EASA CONFERENCE TELLS WHAT IT’S DOING, FAA, too?
EASA, see below, held a two-day conference of the European aviation community in Budapest. The safety organization structured 6 discussions (EMCO, GNSS, runway incursions, emissions, increased employee training and future jobs’ new skills needs) in which the regulator explained what it is doing to meet this high profile challenges and then asked what the participants thought of these initiatives.
In contrast, here turn on the evening news, read your favorite media source or listen to the local Member of Congress, the message will likely be critical about the FAA’s and/or the aviation industry’s performance– inadequate ATC staffing, poor oversight of aircraft certification, or some other worrisome story. PERHAPS THE FAA SHOULD CONSIDER AFFIRMATIVELY REVIEWING WHAT IT IS DOING TO BE PREPARED FOR THE FUTURE.
The first topic that EASA dealt with was a contentious issue labeled “EXTENDED MINIMUM CREW OPERATIONS” (EMCO).
Technology has increasingly converted cockpit tasks into reliable instrumentations and has justified ergonomically reduction of crew workload. In the late 60s, there was a contentious debate about removing the “engineer” position—three to two. Recent computerization (dreaded AI?) advancements now pose the question of whether the 2 pilot complement is required. Some have proposed both seats occupied during the demanding takeoff and landing segments, while one could handle the lesser workload during cruise. The concept of a fulltime one person cockpit is far more controversial and is subject to considerable tech additions.
EASA affirmatively, risking the ire of the vary powerful EU unions, tackled EMCO at its conference. EASA clarified its approach to the concept emphasizing that its staff will scrutinize “smart cockpit” technology and automation to reduce crew workload, aid decision-making, enhance information management, and detect pilot fatigue or incapacitation. FLORIAN GUILLERMET, Executive Director of EASA, declared:
“EASA has made clear from the outset that we will only approve new functionalities once they have been demonstrated to bring safety benefits …We are now adjusting our rulemaking tasks to make clear exactly what we mean by this.”
The participants spent time trying to establish EMCO safety benefits versus risks with some specificity.
The FAA has the same issue pending before it, but Administrator Whitaker preempted real consideration by proclaiming
“It’s the law of the land, and I INTEND FOR IT TO STAY THE LAW OF THE LAND.”
The Luddites would be proud!!! If couched in a broader technological context, with dialogue from both sides, his articulation of this view might have been more acceptable.
Another hot topic on EASA’s agenda was on interference with global navigation satellite system (GNSS) navigation close to conflict zones. The group emphasized the urgent need for some effective method of responding to this threat. Coincidentally, there are recent reports of possible solutions. A Working Group pointed to some immediate, not permanent answers;
- Training: Flight crews must be BETTER TRAINED to detect and handle GPS failures or spoofing incidents. This includes understanding the typical signs of navigation system interference and having a clear contingency plan in case of malfunction.
- Technology upgrade: It is necessary to UPGRADE NAVIGATION EQUIPMENT to make it more resistant to GPS spoofing. Modern systems should be able to detect false signals and use alternative navigation sources when needed.
- Improved collaboration: Airlines, air traffic control (ATC), and authorities must work more closely to share real-time information about GPS disruptions. This will ensure that incidents can be handled quickly and effectively.
- Redundancy of navigation sources: The working group also recommends using multiple sources of navigation information, such as INS (inertial navigation systems), as a safety net in cases where GPS data is compromised.
For more information, read the full report and recommendations from the GPS Spoofing Workgroup.
Again, the Conference discussed another safety concern, RUNWAY INCURSIONS, that involves people (Air Traffic Controllers, Pilots) and technology—although the headline from this session was ‘whether humans were the ‘weakest link’ or rather a strong factor in preventing such occurrences.” Others have identified a mechanism which includes people and machines– Spate of Runway Safety Incidents Sparks Avionics Innovation, like this:
Next, from a continent replete with the Green Party influence, EASA made an important point:
“Whereas aviation is RESPONSIBLE FOR LESS THAN 4% OF THE TOTAL EMISSIONS contributing to climate change according to Our World in Data, there is still an urgent need to limit its impact. Noise reduction was also seen as an important driver for innovation.”
Wonder if this statement was included in any major media report??? See also ACJ’s Study on Business Aircraft – Sword v. the Euro Greens?
Less information was provided in the article about deliberations on the “importance of a well-trained human workforce in all areas of aviation, and the need to attract a new generation of staff into aviation.” Those are important concerns of the FAA, too.
In sum, EASA should be commended for sharing their efforts with the public. Might not the US benefit with such an exposition of the many efforts in which the FAA is engaged—there are more than a few; several are quite promising; all involve technology risks- but such developments must reach beyond the status quo to improve AVIATION SAFETY.
The EASA Annual Safety Conference emphasized the synergy between human expertise and prudent technological application in enhancing aviation safety.
BUDAPEST / COLOGNE – This year’s EASA ANNUAL SAFETY CONFERENCE took as its theme “Safety – technology – and the human dimension”, focusing on the critical importance of the well-trained human in keeping aviation operations safe, and on the parallel need to apply technology prudently to enhance aviation safety even further.
“The human will be at the centre of aviation for decades,” FLORIAN GUILLERMET, Executive Director of EASA said in his opening remarks. “It is our responsibility to consider how technological developments, such as artificial intelligence, can support the human to make aviation safer still. We need to constantly ask ourselves: is aviation as safe as it can be?”
EASA used the opportunity of the conference to CLARIFY ITS APPROACH to proposals from manufacturers that foresee one pilot, rather than two, in the cockpit for specific phases of the flight, a concept referred to as “EXTENDED MINIMUM CREW OPERATIONS” (EMCO). To support eMCO, manufacturers are working on a “smart cockpit” that uses technology and automation to reduce crew workload, aid decision-making, enhance information management, and detect pilot fatigue or incapacitation.
“EASA has made clear from the outset that we will only approve new functionalities once they have been demonstrated to bring safety benefits,” Guillermet said. “We are now adjusting our rulemaking tasks to make clear exactly what we mean by this.”
This topic was discussed further during the first panel of the conference, which looked more widely at the role of technology in enhancing aviation safety. The panel highlighted that all relevant parties want first to see the changes to the cockpit so we can evaluate whether these have indeed enhanced safety while maintaining the current way of operating, i.e. with two pilots on the flightdeck. As a general principle, any new technologies or concepts in aviation must always enhance safety.
Two further panels focused on longer-term actions to tackle current safety risks.
The FIRST PANEL centred on interference with global navigation satellite system (GNSS) navigation close to conflict zones, where blocking or falsifying of signals (jamming and spoofing) presents an issue for pilots in those zones. While currently safety is assured by pilot awareness of the potential issues, there was agreement that in the longer term, a more resilient technological solution at system level is needed to better safeguard decision-making.
The SECOND PANEL looked at human factors in runway incursions, referring in particular to the need to prevent recurrence of the type of accident seen at Haneda, Tokyo on January 2, 2024, where five people lost their lives due to an aircraft collision on the runway. The panel discussed whether humans were the “weakest link” or rather a strong factor in preventing such occurrences. Either way, better use of technology to facilitate decision-making was seen as an important step to reduce the number of those accidents or incidents.
The REMAINING TWO PANELS looked more closely at humans themselves. Societal expectations were seen as a driver for technological change, particularly on environmental grounds, to reduce emissions and meet the European Union climate goals. Whereas aviation is RESPONSIBLE FOR LESS THAN 4% OF THE TOTAL EMISSIONS contributing to climate change according to Our World in Data, there is still an urgent need to limit its impact. Noise reduction was also seen as an important driver for innovation.
All panels stressed the importance of a well-trained human workforce in all areas of aviation, and the final discussion focused on the need to attract a new generation of staff into aviation, some of whom will need entirely new skill sets as technology develops.
Speakers in the panels, addresses, and flash talks spanned national authorities, the industry, pilot associations, EU bodies, and various other aviation experts. The conference was held in Budapest, Hungary from October 30-31, 2024 under the auspices of the Hungarian EU presidency and was attended by around 220 people.
