Unstable Approaches
This 3rd edition of the “Unstable Approaches: Risk Mitigation Policies, Procedures and Best Practices” has been collaboratively written by IATA, CANSO, IFATCA and IFALPA, to address the problems surrounding unstable approaches, a major contributor to accidents.
The safety data from the IATA Global Aviation Data Management (GADM) accident database show that the approach and landing phases of flight account for the major proportion of all commercial aircraft accidents; 61% of the total accidents recorded from 2012-2016 occurred during the approach and landing phase of flight. Unstable approaches were identified as a factor in 16% of those accidents.
Continuous improvements to stable approach criteria and policy compliance, including the discontinuation of an unstable approach, will reduce the risk of an accident. This new publication emphasizes the importance of pilots, air traffic controllers and airport staff working together, along with regulators, training organizations and international trade associations, to agree on measures and procedures to reduce unstable approaches.
Flight Management System
One of the key components of avionics in a modern airliner is the Flight Management System (FMS). An FMS reduces the flight crew’s workload and enhances safety by automating a wide variety of in-flight tasks. However, following the “garbage in – garbage out” principle, an FMS is only as good as the data that is input by the pilot. Pilot data entry errors, especially in performance and navigational data, are potential contributing factors to accidents.
There are many things that pilots, operators and manufacturers can do to reduce the threats and manage the errors associated with operating the FMS, some simple and some more complex. We have published the FMS Data Entry Prevention Best Practices guide for the prevention, trapping and mitigation of FMS data entry errors, to help maintain and improve standards of safety across the industry.
Phraseology
Standard phraseology reduces the risk that a message will be misunderstood and aids the read-back/hear-back process so that any error is quickly detected. Ambiguous or non-standard phraseology is a frequent causal or contributory factor in aircraft accidents and incidents.
In an effort to align procedures relating to published altitude restrictions on Standard instrument Departure (SID) and Standard Terminal Arrival (STAR), we collaborated with the International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations (IFALPA) to jointly prepare a separate follow-on survey for airline pilots. The 2015 2nd edition of the Phraseology Conflict – SIDs/STARs survey report (pdf) on potential misunderstanding is an extension of the 2011 Phraseology Survey.
This edition tackles the Phraseology Conflict: SIDs/STARs survey report on potential misunderstanding as an outcome of the survey to identify risks associated with the problem, taking into account the inconsistent implementations of SID/STAR provisions globally – leading to the development of harmonized recommendations that address those risks.
Phraseology: Pilots and Air Traffic Controllers Phraseology Study
Together with the International Federation of Air Line Pilots' Associations (IFALPA) and the International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers’ Associations (IFATCA), we have prepared on-line surveys regarding communication issues. These focused on the non-use of ICAO standard phraseology. A report was published presenting analysis and results of all surveys as well as identifying areas where established phraseology, or local phraseology, has been, or has the potential, to be misunderstood.