Loading in 2 Seconds...
Loading in 2 Seconds...
Outcome of the last OPSG meeting. Roma 2, 3, 4 May 2007. Capt. Claude Godel OST 07-2. Decisions. OPSG agreed on the following points: OPSG 07-2 Roma was the last OPSG meeting as such. all the OPSG items, still open, will be transferred to EASA via the official “EASA form”
Capt. Claude Godel
Let’s start by an easy one!
During it’s work on Runway Incursion Prevention, OPSG discovered that the go-around was not listed among the critical phases of flight.
We think this should be corrected through an amendment of the definition of the critical phases of flight in the new EU OPS/JAR OPS 1.192
Therefore we will file an EASA FORM and send it to EASA.
Two more to come after
the coffee break!
New item proposed by OPSG.
JAR-OPS 1.405 Commencement and continuation of approach
“…the approach shall not be continued beyond the outer marker, or equivalent position, if the reported RVR/visibility is less than the applicable minima…”
“…Where no outer marker or equivalent position exists, the commander or the pilot to whom conduct of the flight has been delegated shall make the decision to continue or abandon the approach before descending below 1 000 ft above the aerodrome on the final approach segment. If the MDA/DH is at or above 1 000 ft above the aerodrome, the operator shall establish a height, for each approach procedure, below which the approach shall not be continued if the RVR/visibility is less than the applicable minima…”
Before starting any approach, the pilot has to search for either: an OM, an Equivalent position (how is it visualised on the chart?) or 1000ft AAA or a runway specific height.
Modern aerodromes come without any OM.
If the proposal is approved,
in 99% of the cases the Approach Ban Point would be the same:
1000ft above aerodrome
Note: the only different value would be for situations where the MDA/DH is above 500ft AAA. In that case a specific value would be defined in order to keep at least a 500ft margin between the Approach Ban Point and the MDA/DH.
New item proposed by ENAC Italy.
The group developed a proposal to require that at all times when passengers are on board on the ground there be a qualified person on board capable of contacting and liaising with the aerodrome/emergency services should an evacuation become necessary.
Present JAR OPS 1.305 only requires a “qualified person” for “handling communications” during refuelling.
The aim of the proposal is to take care of situations where big jets are boarding hundred of passengers without any Flight crew on board. There should be a clear procedure ensuring that in any type of emergency a qualified person would be able to alert and coordinate actions with the aerodrome emergency services (including when not fuelling).
The OPSG members wish all the best to EASA.
And remain available for any help or clarification