FREE E-Newsletter
Wings Magazine
Subscribe
  ABOUT US   |   CONTACT US   |   SUBSCRIPTION CENTRE   |   ADVERTISE   |   SITEMAP
MAGAZINE
Current Issue
Past Issues
News Archives
Web Exclusives
Video
Photo Gallery
 
MARKETPLACE
Aviation Books
Job Board
Classifieds
New Products
COMMUNITY
Events
AME Hall of Fame
100th Anniversary
Aviation Quiz
Association News
 
RESOURCES
A-List
E-Newsletter
Links
Sitemap
Careers in Aviation
Publications
Helicopters Magazine Careers in Aviation
The Two Worlds Of Aviation

North America is one thing; Africa is quite another

Two recent reports appearing a day apart in the US media highlighted the dichotomy between first-world and third-world aviation safety standards. Two recent reports appearing a day apart in the US media highlighted the dichotomy between first-world and third-world aviation safety standards.

On Sept. 30 the New York Times reported on the end of a 10-year White House mandate to the airline industry and its regulators to cut the domestic rate of fatal scheduled airline accidents by 80%. The mandate followed two notorious crashes in 1996 – TWA off New York’s Long Island and ValuJet in the Florida Everglades – that together killed 375 people.

The 1997 mandate was set by a national commission on aviation safety headed by then Vice-President Al Gore, and at its end the three-year average rate of fatal crashes was down by 65% from the three years ended Sept. 30, 1997. It wasn’t the targeted 80%, but a still-satisfying drop from one fatal accident per 2 million departures to one per 4.5 million departures. As of Sept. 30, there had been no fatal scheduled airliner crashes at all in the US in 2007.

Improvements have included analyzing patterns in ‘safe’ flights that may indicate impending problems (since there are so few crashes to investigate), improving procedures (such as in ‘unstabilized approaches’) and equipment (such as enhanced ground proximity warning systems).

To further head toward the 80% reduction target as traffic increases and very light jets are entering the scene will require replacement of the FAA’s old ATC system, a move now stuck in the political gridlock that affects everything in Washington, DC from immigration reform to health-care reform to how to fight wars. But many safety specialists fear most the rise in ‘ground proximity events’ or runway incursions. The FAA is said to be working on improving the tracking of airplanes on the ground.

That report was on the bright side. On the next day, Oct. 1, came a report in the Wall Street Journal that brought up the dark side. It came from Port Harcourt, Nigeria, the capital of that country’s important oil industry. The 2004-06 passenger airliner fatality rate in Africa was 2.73 fatal accidents per million flights, compared with 0.1 in North America and 0.44 worldwide.

That overall figure was shocking enough, but the WSJ article dwelt on a specific case: the Dec. 10, 2005 crash of a Sosoliso Airlines DC-9 at Port Harcourt Airport with 108 deaths, including 60 children returning from boarding school at the national capital of Abuja 300 miles away. (There were two survivors.) The plane landed in a sudden local storm about whose severity and wind shear conditions the pilots had not been warned (the airport had no meteorological equipment), and the runway edge lights were off. (The runway had no centreline lights.) The crew went well below the decision altitude without having visual contact with the runway; they tried to abort at the last instant, but too late.

The airline has lost its operating licence and the airport, shut down for repairs after the crash, is still closed. The findings of the Nigerian Aviation Ministry’s report on the accident make for unpleasant reading.