SMS and Quality Assurance in General Aviation
 

Are there any GA companies out there that have implemented a SMS into their operation? CAO 82.1 doesn't stipulate that SMS is a requirement (not sure if it's in CASA's crosshairs yet??), however CAO 82.3 does which is directed at RPT and/or scheduled charter operators.

The long term results are pretty obvious, especially if an operator want's to improve safety and secure long term contracts with good clients.

Um, quite a few. In fact, every GA operator I worked at had one. CASA has invested a lot of time and money in developing SMS development material, I'm sure they 'have it in their crosshairs'.

Where is the requirement for non RPT?
How do you implement a SMS in a small operation - less than 4 pilots?

SMS for small operator, no problem
Can be far more productive than its big brothers
Had one running for over a decade
Audits, Casa never showed the slightest interest
But industry audits were all over it with thumbs up

But what does it do?

In a small operation, not much Bob.
SMS on its own is just window dressing if a "Safety Culture"
is not there.
But auditors love it.

Have a read of the proposed regulations 119 & 135, that will give you an idea of the way CASA are heading!

My suggestion would be the sooner you get on to it, the easier the transition will be to the new regulations (whenever that may be). :ok:

An AOC (company structure) has the following staff

Chief Pilot - J Blogs
HAAMC - J Blogs
Managing Director/ Company Secretary/ H Blogs - (Mrs Blogs)

In an SMS you need at least 3 individuals to implement a SMS, Chief Pilot, Safety Officer and company representative.

So who fills each SMS position?

J. Bloggs, H. Bloggs and Sylvester (Company Cat)

Chief Pilot - J Bloggs
Safety Officer - Pilot Number 1
Company Representative - H Bloggs

If there is only one pilot who is the Chief Pilot, I would argue that you don't need a safety system as they will already be aware of the safety concerns within the organisation.

In theory SMS is good. Done properly, the safety benefits are well documented. Less obvious are benefits to business, as CASA and customer auditors love to see SMS. As do insurers.
In practice, all too often SMS really is just touchy-feely window dressing; maybe an excuse to have a meeting now and then. Lots of warm fuzzy statements in the exposition about how the CEO is totally committed to it, ad nauseum. But, here's the rub. All this is on condition that it costs nothing, causes no delays and most importantly, does not involve the CEO actually attending meetings (always too busy on that day), or making promises (certainly not in writing anyway).
At CASA insistence, larger organisations may even employ a safety manager or assign the job to someone to do as an additional duty. They may even have some fancy computer system to log all incidents, then track them to some sort of conclusion. All too often pissant stuff gets reported and a lot of time is wasted on so-called investigation and remedial action. Stuff like a report that a small amount of hot coffee got spilled on someone. After several months of this doing the rounds to all section leaders to comment on (the engineering manager and chief pilot are really interested in this one, not) a decision is made to serve coffee at a lower temperature, or maybe not at all. Then a customer complains, the marketing manager sticks his oar in and the CEO goes ballistic because he wasn't party to the decision and so demands that hot coffee go back on the service. Do CEOs get this far down in to the weeds? You bet they do, but only when it suits them..
A more serious issue - and obviously worthy of a report - would be if a pilot left a pitot cover on. He gets airborne in IMC and soils his pants. More irate customers. All hell breaks loose in SMS Centre. Aided and abetted by the CEO, the non-pilot safety manager demands checklists be modified to include the mention of pitot covers at least three times, the SOP is rewritten to precede the 80 knots airspeed crosscheck with one at every 10 knots all the way to V1. It is proposed that the soiling issue be resolved with fitment of rubber seat covers, but as there is a cost to this, it is rejected. Instead the policy manual is amended to ensure that pilots pay for seat cleaning.
The simplest solution is overlooked, i.e. assigning the pilot to some more line training with considerable emphasis on pre flight inspections. But, hey, this costs money and takes up someone's time. Scratch that.

Simpletons will not be saved by SMS, and neither will it ever eliminate human lapses, yet too often this is seen as its purpose. Cynical? You bet........

Good debate and thanks for the positive responses to my initial post. In my opinion once an organisation has set up a SMS based on it's operational requirements, it should run like clock work provided that all personel have the opportunity to provide input without the fear of retribution if they accidentally mess up.

Interms of dedicated SMS Managers, the positions could be carried out by a person internally or externally, with the later probably being the better option in some cases i.e. cold eyes oversight on the operation.

I'm sure it's only a matter of time before small GA operators will be required by regulation to implement a SMS, and yes CASA and the natural resource companies look favourably on a good working SMS.

SMS's without fear are rare
Our biggest problem was getting pilots to contribute, they all thought it a good idea, wanted to be involved, but their submitted contribution was practically nil
This hurdle was accepted and we just worked around it

I'm now thinking it will just become regimented by casa and that will be the end of its productivity

Look how damp grew to be bigger than Ben Hur