Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Air safety
Date: 2006-07-05
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: air safety, air traffic control, air transport, cooperation policy, safety standard, transport accident

16.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 309/51

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Air safety

(2006/C 309/11)

On 19 January 2006, the European Economic and Social Committee, acting under Rule 29(2) of its Rules
of Procedure, decided to draw up an opinion on: Air safety

The Section for Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society, which was responsible for
preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 30 May 2006. The rapporteur was
Mr McDonogh.

At its 428th plenary session, held on 5 and 6 July (meeting of 5 July 2006), the European Economic and
Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 155 votes to 2 with 3 abstentions.

1. Recommendations

Random drug and alcohol tests should be carried out on

1.8
both flight and cabin crews.

1.1
Cabin crew should be certified or licensed by a compe-
tent Authority in order to guarantee proficiency in their func-
tions (safety, security, medical aspects, passenger management,
etc), as well as technical qualifications on each aircraft type that
they are required to work on.

1.2
Careful consideration must be given by the European
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) before allowing equipment
suppliers autonomy to approve component designs without
recourse to either EASA or the aircraft manufacturers.

Non European Airlines should be approved by EASA

1.3
before they are allowed to fly into or to over fly EU airspace.

1.4
There should be only one rule maker and that must be
EASA. This should allow for the future harmonisation of aero-
drome regulations, and should as far as possible, avoid compe-
titive distortion between EU and non-EU airports. EASA should
be strengthened and given more powers, like those of the Euro-
pean Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC).

1.5
EASA should consider how best for the industry to
protect the safety and integrity of communications, data links
and onboard avionic systems such as electronic flight bags
(EFB) from hacking.

1.6
EASA must ensure that future development of aircraft
such as Light Business Jets (LBJs) are regulated to ensure that
owners and fliers have sufficient
flight hours before being
allowed to commence flight operations. LBJs will have ceilings
of 25 000 ft or more and should be required to meet the main-
tenance and operational standards of larger commercial jets.

1.7
EASA must have the necessary protocols in place before
any consideration is given for the approval of unmanned aerial
vehicle (UAV) flights outside segregated airspace.

1.9
EASA should also ensure that local regulators are prop-
erly qualified for the job, and also have enough staff and
finance.

1.10
A detailed scientific study of the effect on flight and
cabin crew of fatigue, stress, and deep vein thrombosis (DVT)
should be undertaken by EASA.

A review of the policy and procedures for the granting
1.11
of a General Aviation Pilots Licences and the certification of
General Aviation aircraft should be carried out.

EASA should ensure that the introduction of a Euro-
1.12
pean General Aviation Licence, with endorsements, ratings,
pertaining to the approved aircraft to be flown takes place.

1.13
Safety of crew, passengers and residents of areas
affected by air corridors must over-ride political considerations
in banning airlines using European air space.

2. Introduction

2.1 With the cooperation of member
states and their
experts, a black list of 96 airlines has been published. 93 of
them are facing outright bans and three are facing operational
restrictions. Separately, France is considering the introduction
of a new system of safety labels that could be used in adver-
tising.

2.2
Europe has been under pressure to improve its aircraft
safety legislation since early 2004, when a charter aircraft
owned by Flash airlines crashed in the Red Sea killing 148
people, mostly French tourists. That crash highlighted the lack
of co-ordination among governments about sharing safety
information, since it then emerged that Flash had been banned
by the Swiss aviation authorities.

C 309/52

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

16.12.2006

2.3
Consistency and harmonisation among member states in
relation to the standards of operation of airlines is crucial, if
the black list is to have the desired effect. Member states must
avoid a situation where for economic and social reasons one
state decides that an airline listed is ‘marginally acceptable’ to
operate on its airports while the other member states see the
airlines standards as unacceptable.

2.4
However, Brussels has been asked to intervene in some
disputes, notably, when Turkey was angered about a decision
by some European Governments, led by Netherlands, to with-
draw temporarily the landing rights of Onur Air, a budget
Turkish airline on safety grounds. Separately, Greece is under
pressure to make progress in its investigation of the crash of
the Helios Airways aircraft that was flying from Larnaca in
Cyprus.

2.5
Areas of concern are general maintenance standards,
crew training, crew flying hours, and rest periods and fuel
saving practices, and noise commitment, also air traffic control.

2.6
Since the increased competition in the aviation sector,
and the precarious financial position of many airlines, has
brought about increased pressure in crews to take off in condi-
tions which they would not normally fly in, and also to fly
planes that are not completely air worthy. The crews are under
increasing pressure to take off as the airlines under EU regula-
tions have either put up the passengers for a night, or compen-
sate them for delays. All this impinges on safety. There is also
the added problem that many national aviation authorities tend
to turn a blind eye to the enforcement of many regulations,
where the national airline is concerned.

Despite a ban in a number of European countries,
2.7
because of safety concerns, a certain airline is still flying into
Brussels and Paris. Switzerland, with its stern cultural fixation
with business confidentiality, had banned 23 aircraft
from
flying through its airspace, although the names, and even the
number of companies, remained classified.

3. Effects of fatigue and performance safety

to be able to take rest periods on long flights, but for this they
need proper facilities which should include flat beds, etc.

There is plenty of evidence to show that fatigue is a
3.3
factor in safety.
In a recent National Transportation Safety
Board report on the fatal crash at Kirksville, Missouri on the
19 October 2004 — The NTSB outlined ‘the less than optimal
overnight rest time available, the early reporting time for duty,
the length of the duty days, the number of flight legs, the
demanding conditions — non-precision approaches
flown
manually in conditions of low ceiling and reduced visibilities
— encountered during long duty days, it is likely that fatigue
contributed to the pilots' degraded performance and decision
making.’

3.4
True or not, no pilot with a modicum of experience can
deny having occasionally had to battle a bout of fatigue or that
it somehow affected their performance. The quality of sleep
during rest periods is very important.

Diet and nutrition also play any important role. For
3.5
example, any pilot from a brand new student to the about to
retire captain will tell you that the beverage of choice among
pilots is coffee. However, while coffee is a stimulant and causes
a temporarily increased level of alertness, fatigue is sympto-
matic of its withdrawal. Furthermore, coffee is a diuretic, which
causes the body to discharge more fluid than it is taking in,
resulting in dehydration, which in turn can cause fatigue.

3.6
Boredom is a major problem with tiredness on long
haul flights, where aircraft are almost completely automatic. To
keep the crew alert, some airlines particularly in trans-Siberia
flights insist that the automatic pilot is re-set every hour.

3.7 Many of the accidents in aviation are due to pilot error,
and fatigue is a major cause of those errors.

3.8
It is planned for EASA to take over the licensing process
and replace the current JAA in this area, however the use of
International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO)
licences
obtained in the US and operated by pilots in Europe may not
be affected by this change.

3.1
Fatigue has been blamed in numerous aviation accidents
over the years and is a continuing problem facing crews flying
aircraft of all sizes. But how can a pilot recognise when he or
she is too tired to fly? What roles do sleep cycles, dehydration,
nutrition and illness play in identifying and responding to
fatigue?

4. Cabin crew

3.2
Pilots going through various time zones are bond to
suffer fatigue and impairment of judgement. They are supposed

All improvement regarding rest requirements for flight
4.1
crew should — where practicable — also apply to cabin crew,
who must be fully alert in preventing any safety or security
occurrence as well as the case of emergency.

16.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 309/53

4.2
Cabin crew should have adequate training in resuscita-
tion and be always competent in their native language, and at
least ICAO level 4 English, and be able to facilitate communica-
tion with passengers in the event of an emergency.

5. Air traffic control

5.1
The EESC has already expressed its views on air traffic
control (ATC) and problems associated with it (1). The proposed
SESAR system, if and when it is introduced, should improve
safety. This is subject to another paper of the EESC (2), but this
does not get away from the fact that Europe needs a uniformed
ATC system which transgresses boundaries of all countries and
where Eurocontrol would be recognised as a ‘Federal Regulator’
similar to, e.g. the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in the
USA. The awarding of
in Eurocontrol's
TMA2010+ programme is welcomed.

the first contract

5.2
There is strong need for standardisation and integrated
systems to be introduced throughout Europe in the interests of
safety.

It is desirable to also introduce appropriate certification

5.3
of air traffic safety electronics personnel (ATSEP).

6. Aircraft maintenance

6.1
There appears to be a difficulty for some member states
to convert their national rules to European Part 66 standards.
Maintenance licences issued by states are based on the require-
ments set by the Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA) and were
adopted into national law to give them legal teeth. Under the
EASA system, however, the licensing rules are subject to Euro-
pean Union law. Enforcing them appears to be a lengthy
process and subject to appeal.

6.2
In 2005 all 25 EU members took up a derogation
option under which they were given until September 2005 to
meet Part 66. Dates set by EASA for states to comply with
safety rules need to be enforced or at lease agreed dates should
be made with all parties so as to avoid the need for extension
of deadlines or transition periods.

minutes on average for short haul can certainly not be consid-
ered as adequate in all cases.

6.5
Adequate resources need to be allocated also, and also
qualified staff who use only certified parts to carry out mainte-
nance.

6.6
Random inspections and audits should be carried out by
the National Aviation Authority to see that standards are being
maintained.

7. Airline companies

7.1
Airline companies must be financially sound and prop-
erly financed before a start up licence is granted, states should
be also required to monitor financial performance on a regular
basis to ensure that there is no ‘corner cutting’.

7.2
They must have
management available to them.

experience

and have

competent

8. Competencies of the European Aviation Safety Agency

8.1
The current intention of the European Commission is to
further extend the competencies of EASA in the field of regu-
lation (including safety and interoperability) of airports, air
traffic management and air navigation services.

support

EASA as

8.2 We
regulations
1592/200/EC and believe that a European framework for
procedures and authorisations for aircraft and appliances issued
by a single authority certainly improve aviation safety and effi-
ciency in Europe.

created

by

8.3
There is an opportunity for EASA to address the issue of
standards and recommended practices (SARPS) and the anoma-
lies that are created by the ‘Recommended Practice’ and ‘Stand-
ard Practices’ found in the ICAO Annex documentation.

6.3
The EESC wonders if there is a provision for EASA to
monitor, if required, the outsourcing of maintenance by Low
Cost Carriers (LCC) to maintenance facilities in third countries.

9. General aviation licensing

6.4
Adequate time needs to be allowed for inspection on the
ground, particularly in the turn around of the aircraft. The 25

Private pilot licensers (PPL) operating on FAA licences in
9.1
European airspace should be required to have an EASA endor-
sement on their licence.

(1) Air transport: Community air traffic controller licence, single Euro-
(rapporteur: Mr McDonogh), OJ C 234,

pean sky package
22/09/2005, p. 0017-0019.

(2) Common enterprise — SESAR CESE 379/2006 rapporteur: Mr

McDonogh.

9.2
All general aviation aircraft (GA) must comply with EU
standards set by EASA before being allowed to fly in European
airspace.

C 309/54

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

16.12.2006

10. Avionics safety

12. EASA

10.1
EASA should produce guidelines/rules for protecting
specific equipment or networks against ‘acts of unlawful interfer-
ence’ as defined by ICAO.

10.2
the other areas of vulnerability would be:

Apart from the increasing use of Ethernet (LAN) and IP

— increased use of air/ground data link technologies for

communications by passengers, airlines and ATC;

— more general use of data and software transfer using
networks on aircraft and between ground sites for produc-
tion, delivery, maintenance or update purposes;

— the multiplication of software viruses and hacker attacks,
plus the search for confidential data through interconnected
networks.

11. Unmanned Airborne Vehicles (UAVs)

EASA must have the necessary powers to regulate this
11.1
area of the industry not only from airworthiness and design
but also the certification of ground operators,
launching
systems etc.

12.1
EASA is the overall EU regulator. It lays down the prin-
ciples and rules for airline safety in the EU. It is under financed,
under staffed, and it has no power of enforcement.

12.2
rules and regulations.

It depends on various National Regulators to enforce

This amounts to self-regulation. No national regulator
12.3
would be likely to clamp down on an airline in its jurisdiction,
unless there was an extremely serious problem.

12.4
National regulators are also responsible for all aircraft,
which are registered in their country, and whose company
have offices located there. These aircrafts and crews are very
often based and operated out of other EU countries. This
makes proper regulation more problematic.

The requirement by EASA to the National Regulators
12.5
to implement its decisions could lead to an un-even implemen-
tation of the rules and regulations in the EU, due to different
interpretations. This could lead in the airline industry to flags
of convenience where one country appears more lax in the
interpretation of regulations than others.

12.6 Meanwhile, the Airport Security Regulator, ECAC, has
the power to audit local
levels of compliance. EASA should
have this.

11.2
All regulations pertaining to conventional aircraft must
be considered obligatory for UAVs and all airspace users
should be consulted where this type of activity could affect
those users.

12.7
EASA is currently funded from certification revenues
which has left it with a forecast loss of EUR 15 million for
2006,
it is critical that the necessary funding from central
government be forth coming to ensure EASA's future.

Brussels, 5 July 2006

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Anne-Marie SIGMUND