Business Aviation Safety Standards - What do you think?

[foxtrott-romeo-a-x]

Folks I really would be interestd in your view - does our industry need saftey standarts set by an IT / GDS provider? Me as a commercial BizJet operator I doing daily my best to operate safely and minimize any risks. Do you think it is necessary to have a Saftey Standart which at the end of the day ranks you?

Looking forward to your comments.

Please check:
Avinode Press (http://press.avinode.com/)

[Stratocaster]

What a farce! What's the added value to safety of having ANOTHER standard totally similar to the ones already existing? None. Brookers will say yes to anything that does not cost them anything and vaguely covers their butts. Pax who know nothing might be tempted, without realising they're wasting money. Wyvern is not an officially accepted means of compliance to EASA requirements anyway.

I have the impression Wyvern and ARG/US made a bit of sense up to 5-10 years ago, but not anymore now that SMS is mandatory for everyone.

[Mizuno boy]

There are a lot of variables to consider;
Is it a stand alone corporate flight operation, or a managed/charter operation.
In my opinion the stand alone operations tend to have higher standards as they are not in it for the profit (not pressured to complete flights), but to offer the safest, most efficient transportation for their corporation/principals.
Having said that this depends on the leadership (DFO, Chief Pilot) to set the standard from the start. I have seen a number of what could be excellent flight departments ruined by individuals bowing to pressure from aggressive pax, personal agenda, and bean counters, therefore setting bad precedence that are difficult to reverse.
SMS is a good concept to hopefully lift the bar for the "weaker" operations, but it is only as good as the individual/operator implementing and using it.
Haven't we been using risk analysis all along in our day to day operations?(WX,airport conditions, area of operation, etc.)
Common sense and proffessionalism should prevail.

Safe Flying
MB

[Gulfstreamaviator]

In many areas this is true.

For example, the culture in may airlines and mostly more east than west based, thay the Company rules will be strictly enforced, (unless it is convenient not to).
The regulator, is in the same family, as the airline owner.

The captain is king, until the accident report states otherwise.

In general Corporate operations, whislt they look outside of the accepted box, are self regulating, but the guy at the sharp end. He knows the situation on that day. The CEO, MD or whatever, mostly knows that at the accident the Captain will be first to arrive followed by him, and not leave him sitting in the Ivory tower, watching the blue lights in the diatance.

As to SMS, with the present requirement to regulate with a very restrictive Ops Manual, and SMS etc,e tc, the operation will be heavily loaded with staff and paperwork, and WILL reduce the safety datum that is sitting in the Flight Deck.

glf

[DA50driver]

Hi,

It does make sense on some level. We have co-pilots that are not acceptable on Wyvern Flights as they have less than 2000 hours total time, less than 1500 Multi Engine.

I used to fly charters in Europe after having flown straight corporate in the US before that. None of our guys had less than 4000 hours when hired, most had multiple type ratings and as a corporate operator we were safer than the AOC holder I ended up flying for in Europe.

Insurance dictates a lot in our business, if the company chartering has a policy that states that the operator has to be Wyvern certified you will not get the trip if you don't have said credentials.

It does weed out some questionable operators. This should be the job of the respective regulator, but as we know this does not always happen.

[LGW Vulture]

Don't get me on the Wyvern subject - when operators have to pay Wyvern for the audit is that not a conflict? I've audited operators and ripped them to shreds only to see the Wyvern seal of approval drop through the door that very same day from an audit that was completed by them only 10 days previous.

Not. Worth. The. Paper. Its. Written. On.:ugh:

[machone]

Remember that insurance companies are all the same. They still insure the airline with co-pilots with only 200 hrs flying 737. The only thing that changes is they way the books say the airline flies.
If you pay for some report that says you are fantastic, how does that help when you are not.

This industry needs to stand up and be counted. If standards go up so does safety. It all costs money but how much does it cost when you bend/break an aircraft or the boss. Remember that people flying a desk only fall 3 feet at no speed. when we fall 3 ft we are usually still doing 120knots. Our life our choice.

[SinglePilotCaptain]

The answer to this might depend on what your trying to accomplish...after 20 years in corporate, watching some of the stupidest, rule breaking, immoral types of operations running with impunity, even with the FAA involved.....

(much like the SEC 'watching' Bernie Madoff) I would say that you should save yourself a future stroke, nervous breakdown...and simply run your operation safe...that's what I did..

No one wants to hear from a guy like me talking safety..it runs against the grain of boss's hiring idiots...airlines hiring kids, pals and buddies..

What will happen, and does happen is when people die...too much...THATS WHEN congress...the FAA ect will do something about it.....like when a kid gets run over by a car...THEN they put up speed bumps..

I suspect that in the end, it's a kind of Darwinism...where you can point everyone to the right way...but they usually won't go...so they have to get eaten, killed, blown up, ect...before they take notice....

People are stupid.

[Shell Management]

IS-BAO is the only true independent standard for business aviation evlauation and SMS.

Many of those private American rating system are simply a money making con to lull the ill-informed into a false sense of security.

[mutt]

So Avinode will only use operators that are Wyvern certified and this can only be done by AQS. . Does anyone see a blatant conflict of interest in this cozy arrangement ?

Mutt

[x933]

In my opinion, Avinode have dropped a massive bollock on this and I suspect it might be something to do with the CharterX buy out. I suspect a lot of european operators will take the view that seen as our resident aviation authorities set the bar much higher to obtain and maintain some form of charter certificate, SMS systems, etc are much more prevalent here and our level of accountability (in the UK at least) is greater than that which exists in the USA.

I would be interested to see figures supporting a hypothesis that accidents that have occured in the past to operators which would have passed a Wyvern/Argus audit, thus completely undermining any form of audit agency.

[NuName]

"as our resident aviation authorities set the bar much higher to obtain and maintain some form of charter certificate, SMS systems, etc are much more prevalent here and our level of accountability (in the UK at least) is greater than that which exists in the USA."

And has it had any significant effect on safety when compared to the USA?

I'm sure it has a significant effect on the revenue that goes to the authority.

[SinglePilotCaptain]

Maybe we don't need more standards, but actual enforcement of the standards in place..

What a novel idea..right?