# Presentation: 711314

## Need for Rulemaking Harmonization – Supporting the Future Global Air Transport SystemEASA/FAA Annual Conference, St Petersburg, Florida, 4th June 2008

***Vincent De Vroey***
***General Manager Technical & Operations***
***Association of European Airlines (AEA)***

**European Airlines’ View and a Perspective from IATA**

***Peter ******Sørensen****** ***
***Assistant Director***
***Safety, Operations & Infrastructure***
***International Air Transport Association (IATA)***

## Overview

**AEA Harmonization Priorities**
**ATM**
**Maintenance**
**Operations**
**Flight crew training**
**IATA Perspective**
**Personnel licensing**

## 33 member airlines
11,115 flights a day
375,600 employees
605 destinations in 161 countries
346 million passengers
6 million tonnes of cargo
Total turnover of €75 billion

***33****** ******member airlines***
***11,115****** ******flights****** ******a****** ******day***
***375,600****** ******employees***
***605****** ******destinations in ******161****** countries***
***346 million****** ******passengers***
***6 million****** tonnes of cargo***
***Total turnover of ******€75 billion***
***	***

**The Association of European Airlines**

**Notes:**
UIA: 300 flights a week (~ 43 a day) – AeroSvit: don't know - 
UIA: 300 flights a week (~ 43 a day) – AeroSvit: don't know - 
UIA: 300 flights a week, hence approx. 43 a day. AeroSvit: don't know, assuming about the same or a bit less.
UIA: 1.6 million pax in first 9 months of 2007. AeroSvit: 1.3 million from January to November 2007, and 3904 tonnes of cargo.

## AEA carriers are NETWORK carriers: global reach 

**	****Thanks to the networks and alliances which those carriers have set up, people can fly **_*from*_** anywhere, **_*to*_** anywhere**

-  **185** intercontinental destinations in 116 countries
-  **211** European destinations in 43 countries
-  **800** destinations together with partner airlines!

- Source: Continental Airlines

**Notes:**
It is clear from these figures that Network carriers have a major stake in the international market. Up to 70 percent of their traffic is with non European countries and for many decades, they have played a vital role in linking local economies with the rest of the world.
To be able to provide this service to their passengers, they have created and adopted an Hub and Spoke structure. This is why, through Charles de Gaulle, it is possible for someone living in the area of Bordeaux to travel in a reasonable period of time to Kuala Lumpur on the other side of the globe

## AEA’s top priority: Europe's inefficient Air Traffic Management (ATM)

**AEA’s top priority: Europe's inefficient Air Traffic Management (ATM)**

**Europe does not have one single ATM system:**
**It is patched together from old national systems**
**... ****with segmentation into small, inefficient blocks**
- Between Member States – and between civil/military
**... ****using a variety of different Air Traffic Control technologies**

## Background (1): European ATM is inefficient

## Background (2): US ATM system faces safety issues

**TCAS RA’s**
**AEA members flying to the USA have analyzed TCAS RA’s on approach comparing major US airports with European major airports**
**The rate at some US airports (Newark, LAX, Denver, Philadelphia, SFO) is 100 times the rate at major European airports (LHR, CDG, SPL, FRA etc)**
**Compliance with ICAO**
**Various serious safety incidents linked to the US ATM environment with loss of separation or near collision. In light of the Ueberlingen  accident, all TCAS RA’s have to be complied with (ICAO), a modus operandi which is not fully understood in the USA**
**US ATM safety issues need to be tackled with urgency**

## ATM: implications for rulemaking

**Root of ATM problems in Europe, USA and other areas of the world might not be the same**
**However, where it implies rulemaking to mandate for capacity or safety reasons, new systems on the aircraft (avionics) or operational procedures, the AEA members expect: **
***Identical technical solutions for similar ATM problems***
***Harmonized approach on ATM operational procedures***
***Globally valid operational & airworthiness approval for airlines/aircraft (ia datalink, ADS-B, RVSM etc) with approvals issued by the local Authority based on globally harmonized requirements***
**Global interoperability in ATM solutions and approvals is essential for globally operating airlines (= cost issue!)**
**Harmonized operational procedures are essential for safety**

## Maintenance: mutual recognition rather than full harmonization of rules

**Globally recognized Part-145 approvals**
**Airline MROs expect globally recognized Part-145 approvals which recognize equivalent safety oversight and reduce the number of unnecessary audits or certificates**
**Harmonization / Recognition**
**Full harmonization of the relevant rules is not realistic because of the cost implications or different legal environment (f.e. drug and alcohol testing is illegal in Europe, required in the USA)**
**Mutual recognition of each other system (based on equivalent safety) might be more realistic (i.e. through BASA) than full harmonization**
**This should not prevent new rules to be harmonized where possible and beneficial to the industry**

## Operations: harmonizing existing rules would be extremely costly

**Mutual Recognition of AOCs **
**Global Airlines expect mutual recognition of AOCs rather than the current proliferation of Part 129 requirements which create unnecessary bureaucracy for no added safety value**
**Harmonization / Recognition**
**Full harmonization of existing operational rules for AOC holders (EU-OPS, Part 121) is not needed from the airlines point of view since it would be extremely costly due to the legacy and different legal systems and cultural environment **
**Operational equipment related requirements for newly build aircraft should be harmonized wherever possible (e.g. FDR/CVR, TCAS etc). **
**AWO requirements to be harmonized as well**
**New rules to be harmonized where possible and where there is a value for the airlines**

## Flight Crew Training 

**Separate business**
**The Flight Crew Training business is increasingly becoming a separate business competing in the global market**
**International trade **
**Some current rules (FAA) or rulemaking proposals (EASA) are a barrier to international trade**
**For safety and efficiency reasons, European airlines need access to flight crew training resources around the world i.a in Europe, USA and elsewhere**
**Harmonization / Recognition**
**Different authorities to recognize each other systems’ without imposing additional restrictions  or duplicate requirements for personnel licensing or approvals (flight simulators)**
**The planned BASAs are an opportunity to solve this problem**

## Conclusion

**ATM rules****: new systems on the aircraft (avionics) or operational procedures should be ****harmonized with globally valid approvals**** ****(= cost and safety issue),**
**Maintenance rules****: need ****mutual recognition ****of the relevant approvals allowing international trade without barriers and reducing unnecessary audits,**
**Operational rules for AOC holders****: no need for full harmonization which would be costly and might not be feasible (different cultures etc). Need for ****mutual recognition of AOCs**** ****rather than proliferation of Part 129,**
**Flight Crew Training rules****: BASA’s should remove current restrictions to ****international trade**

## The challenge of licensed

**The challenge of licensed**
**personnel shortages**

## Why Harmonization is Critical for Personnel Licensing

**The aviation industry has realized that there will be a global shortage of engineers, licensed mechanics as well as pilots**
**e.g. an estimated shortage of  3.600 pilots annually**
**The aviation industry estimate a fleet growth of 17650 aircraft by 2018**
**In times of high training demand, training quality is at stake and consequently negative impact on flight safety**
**Variations in training standards worldwide add to the problem**
**Quality level of key personnel must be maintained**
**Risks for delayed aircraft introductions and missed opportunities for growth and ROE**

- .

## Industry’s Initiative – IATA Training and Qualification Initiative (ITQI)

**IATA’s initiative to **
**review the airline industry training needs for licensed personnel (pilots, mechanics / engineers) and **
**develop recommendations for meeting these needs with no compromise to safety and quality.**

## ITQI Deliverables

## Consultant

_**KEY DELIVERABLE:**_

**Problem / Impact**
**Analysis**

**Staff Selection &**
**Assessment**
**Criteria**

_**KEY DELIVERABLES:**_

_**KEY DELIVERABLES:**_

- ICAO

**Qualification**
**Requirements**

_**KEY DELIVERABLES:**_

- Boeing

**Training**
**Devices & Syllabi**

**Cert. Standard for Training**
**Providers**

**Deliverables**

**2008**

**2009**

**2010**

**Achieve ICAO ANC approval**

**Complete guidance material & working paper for ICAO**

**Develop audit scheme**

**Complete gap analysis of existing requirements / regulations**

_**KEY DELIVERABLES:**_

**Complete gap analysis of certification standards**

**Complete development of certification standards**

**Complete gap analysis of selection criteria**

**Complete development of selection criteria / best practices guide**

**Implement regionally**

**Complete gap analysis of training devices**

**Complete first draft of best practices and guidance material**

**Complete development of guidance material & implem. concept**

**Conduct market survey**

**Element B1**

**Element B4**

**Element B2**

**Element B3**

## Member airline survey to verify actual challenges
Draft working paper for simulator standards
Implementation plan for Multi-Crew Pilot Licensing (MPL)
Action plan for harmonization of Flight Crew Licenses

**Draft working paper for simulator standards**
**Implementation plan for Multi-Crew Pilot Licensing (MPL)**
**Action plan for harmonization of Flight Crew Licenses**

**Achievements**

**Safety impact analysis**
**Government awareness program **
**Gap Analysis of current global and national regulations**
**Draft industry standard for Flight Training Devices**
**Best practice and guidance material for training concepts**

**Next Steps**

## Final ITQI outcome and spin-offs

**Final ITQI outcome and spin-offs**

- Project phases

## Summary

**Regulators will be key to implementation of ITQI **
**A global and collaborative initiative to mitigate the threats inherent to the global shortage of licensed personnel.**
**Secured resources and buy-in from all segments of the aviation industry, **
-  to ensure SAFETY
-  to create awareness among the industry, governments and         regulators
-  to develop global standards and harmonization needs
-  to work on solutions
-  to develop the New Generation Aviation Professionals
**Open for all industry stakeholders**

## Industry Stakeholders

**ICAO, FSF, IFALPA, EASA, Transport Canada, CASA, NCAA, ATA, **
**JAL, CAL, EVA, SIA, MES, SAS, LH, ANA, Delta, IB, Fedex, AF, SAA, KLM, Qantas, **
**Airbus, Boeing, ATR, Embraer, Bombardier**
**LFT, LTT, CAE, Alteon, ****FSEMC**** **
**MSI, Thales**