160 likes | 276 Views
Oxygen Study Group. Report for OST 05 - 4 30 November 2005 Dr. Annette Ruge Aviation Health Unit, CAA UK. OSG – The Requirements. JAR – OPS 1.760 First-aid oxygen Proposal to provide oxygen for passengers who may need it during normal flight JAR – OPS 1.770 Supplemental oxygen
E N D
Oxygen Study Group Report for OST 05 - 4 30 November 2005 Dr. Annette Ruge Aviation Health Unit, CAA UK
OSG – The Requirements • JAR – OPS 1.760 First-aid oxygen • Proposal to provide oxygen for passengers who may need it during normal flight • JAR – OPS 1.770 Supplemental oxygen • Proposal to decrease oxygen provision after decompression between altitudes 15000 ft and 14000 ft from 30% of passengers to 10% of passengers
History of OSG • 1999: Operations Committee installs OSG • October 2002: A-NPA OPS-32 (Oxygen) circulated for comments • April 2003: Comment-Response Document and amended proposal to EQSC. Decision not to launch a full NPA
History of OSG • June 2003: Specialist Group • to evaluate the proposals and • provide evidence that proposals are safe • January 2005: Evaluation from 3 specialists received: Amended requirements may be safe for (young and) healthy passengers
Proposed amendments ICAO & FAA • JAR – OPS 1.770 • is not ICAO compliant today • no plans to amend ICAO rule • the proposed amendments further decrease the provision for supplemental oxygen • existing JAR – OPS 1.770 is marginally lower than FAR 121.133 (e) (depending on aircraft type)
OSG • OSG re-installed in OST 04-1 • No members from NAAs werenominated • UK view: Amend JAR – OPS 1.770 only if compelling medical evidence can be produced that the new provisions are safe for all occupants of an aeroplane
OSG • AEA and Airbus nominated members • Industry view: • Circulate the proposals as they stand in A-NPA OPS 32 as full NPA • consider to restrict changes to certain routes (Greenland, Iran, Afghanistan), or • consider to grant exemptions for these routes as FAA does
Medical Evidence • Most studies have been carried out in the 1930ies in the military • Opinions about safety vary because • the travelling public ages • passengers with medical conditions travel • even normal cabin altitude (8000 ft) is a medical problem for some passengers
Options • Amend JAR – OPS 1.770 for specific routes • may be too complicated • (rules should be simple) • Grant exemptions as FAA does • compromises harmonisation in Europe • Continue without change
Stabilisation Criteria for NPA activity • Any proposed change to conform with: • lead to a positive contribution to the JAA’s aim for safety; or • to correct an acute implementation problem; or • to align with the EU; or • to comply with IACO Annexes; or • to harmonise with FAA; or • to permit the rapid implementation of new technological processes
The OST is asked to note that • there is no compelling medical evidence that the proposed amendments are safe for all occupants of an aircraft • medical evidence supporting the proposals does exist for healthy passengers
The OST is asked to note that • the proposal in JAR – OPS 1.760 to carry medical oxygen may be of advantage for sick passengers • Industry is in favour of the proposed changes - or possibility of exemptions for specific routes - to regain a global level playing field
The OST is asked to note that • the OSG did not achieve full consensus on the proposed amendments as outlined in A-NPA OPS 32 • the JAA criteria for a NPA are not met
The way ahead • The OST is asked to agree on the way forward with the options: • to continue the work considering specific routes only; or • to consider exemptions from the requirements for specific routes; or
The way ahead • The OST is asked to agree on the way forward with the options: • not to amend JAR – OPS 1.770 but consider changes to 1.760; or • not to amend the oxygen provisions in JAR – OPS