Cabin Safety Task Force (CSTF) Initiative

1. Cabin Safety Task Force (CSTF) Initiative JAA Operations Division Presented at OST # 03-4

2. Cabin Safety Task Force (CSTF) Initiative Need for coordinated CERT/OPS approach in dealing with JAR 25/JAR OPS 1 requirements related to cabin safety issues OST 02-4 mtg (18-21 Nov. 2002) decision CJAA OPS Div to coordinate with CERT/REG Divs for solutions. CSTF established Joint CERT/OPS group under OPS/REG director’s authority e.g. ‘direct view’ in the cabin versus location of c/c stations equipped with PA/interphone systems. TORs decided through coordinated OPS/CERT/REG approach

3. Cabin Safety Task Force (CSTF) Terms ofreference (TORs) TASKS: Review existing regulations, at least: • JAR 25.785: Seats, berths, safety belts and harnesses (including direct view); • JAR 25.1423: Public address system; • JAR OPS 1.310: Crew members at stations; • IEM OPS 1.310 (b): Cabin crew seating positions; • JAR OPS 1.690: Crew member interphone system; • JAR OPS 1.695: Public address system; • JAR OPS 1.990: Number and composition of cabin crew; • IEM OPS 1.990: Number and composition of cabin crew. Identify issues of conflict for the above; recommended areas of amendments, refer findings / recommendations to the OPS/REG directors.

4. Cabin Safety Task Force (CSTF) Terms ofreference (TORs) COMPOSITION: Representation from the following: • National Authorities, Manufacturers, Cabin Crew Associations; • Flight Crew Cabin Crew Study Group (FCCCSG); Cabin Safety Steering Group (CSSG); Operations Procedures Study Group (OPSG) TIMESCALE: The group was set up for six months (until the end of November 2003). REPORTING: • To the CJAA OPS/REG Directors • The CJAA OPS/REG Directors after reviewing CSFF recommendations; where necessary, refer such issues to the relevant Study/Steering Groups for consideration.

5. Cabin Safety Task Force (CSTF) CSTF CONCLUSIONS: • ‘Assigned’ in ‘cabin crew assigned stations’ JAR OPS 1.310 – Crew members at stations ‘(b) ------- required cabin crew members shall be seated at their assigned stations during take-off and landing.’ Open to interpretaions: • ‘assigned’ at the time of aeroplane certification???? • ‘assigned’ by the operator??? • ‘assigned’ by the senior cabin crew member during briefing????

6. Cabin Safety Task Force (CSTF) CSTF RECOMMENDATIONS: • ‘Assigned’ in ‘cabin crew assigned stations’ OPSG/CSSG to review JAR OPS 1.310 and IEM OPS 1.310 in order To: • Remove any ambiguity regarding the term ‘assigned’; • Reflect that determination of cabin crew seating positions should be based on aeroplane certification criteria. The criteria should specify that it is the minimum number of required cabin crew stations, that must be occupied by a cabin crew member, for take-off and landing and in the interest of safety.

7. Cabin Safety Task Force (CSTF) CSTF CONCLUSIONS: • ‘Required cabin crew member station’ JAR OPS 1.310 – Cabin crew seating position ‘(b) ---- assigned stations---’ JAR OPS 1.690 – Crew member interphone system ‘(b) (4) ----- required cabin crew stations -----’ (the only JAR paragraph to use this terminology) JAR 25.785 – Seats, Berths, Safety belts and Harnesses ‘(h) (4) ----- seat designated for use by the cabin crew -----’ JAR 25 – There is no JAR 25 requirement for ‘required cabin crew stations’. That is left to the Operational Rule.

8. Cabin Safety Task Force (CSTF) CSTF RECOMMENDATIONS: • ‘Required cabin crew member station’ (ctnd) • Need for consistency in the terminology of JAR OPS 1 and JAR 25. b) JOEB process to concentrate on issues like: - required cabin crew stations - minimum number of cabin crew - requirements of JAR OPS 1, subpart K (Instruments and Equipment. • Need for: - definition of ‘required c/c member station’ - defining who is responsible for this determination e.g. the manufacturer/the regulatory authority/the operator)

9. Cabin Safety Task Force (CSTF) CSTF RECOMMENDATIONS: • ‘Required cabin crew member station’ (ctnd) Starting point in the attempt to define ‘required cabin crew Station’. A required cabin crew station: • is one that must be occupied for take-off and landing by a required c/c member. • must meet the requirements of JAR 25.785 (seats, berths, safety belts and harness) • must meet the requirements of JAR OPS 1, subpart K (Instruments and Equipment) • required c/c stations are initially determined at the time of the aircraft certification during the JAR 25.803 process.

10. Cabin Safety Task Force (CSTF) CSTF CONCLUSIONS: - Type A exits - JAR 25.785 – Seats, Berths, Safety Belts and Harnesses ‘(h) (1) ----- a cabin crew member seat must be located adjacent to each type A emergency exit’. But there is no operational rule to require that such seats be occupied by a cabin crew member for take-off and landing. CSTF RECOMMENDATIONS: - FCCCSG to address JAR 25.785 requirement for c/c seats located adjacent to each type A exit. - To determine if JAR OPS 1.990 criteria should reflect this.

11. Cabin Safety Task Force (CSTF) CSTF CONCLUSIONS: • Number and composition of cabin crew - JAR OPS 1.990 – Number and composition of cabin crew: • Its relationship with JAR 25/JAR OPS 1 requirements listed under TORs, doesn’t seem to need any amendment. • JAR OPS 1.990 is clearly linked to the JAR 25 paragraphs under TORs. CSTF RECOMMENDATIONS: • The wording of JAR-OPS 1.990 is quite clear and provides a degree of flexibility whilst not deviating too far from the requirements of JAR 25.803 – Emergency Evacuation. • An amendment to the current wording is not considered necessary.

12. Cabin Safety Task Force (CSTF) CSTF CONCLUSIONS: • PA / interphone systems - JAR OPS 1.690 – Crew member interphone system Criteria for accessibility is less restrictive – does not require access from seated position. JAR OPS 1.695 – Public address system Criteria for accessibility is more restrictive – requires access from seated position. JAR 25.1423 – Public address system Coincides with JAR OPS 1.695 (requires access from seated position) JAR 25 ---- - There is no requirement for interphone system.

13. Cabin Safety Task Force (CSTF) CSTF CONCLUSIONS: • PA / interphone systems (ctnd) - CSTF RECOMMENDATIONS: • With the new flight deck security procedures, the need for unambiguous cabin crew interphone requirements is the more important. • EQSG to review JAR OPS 1.690 / JAR OPS 1.695 and address the disconnect. • Any changes of the above to be harmonised with: 1. JAR 25.1423 – Public address system 2. proposed JAR 25 requirements for interphone system - JAR 25 should be amended to include criteria for interphone system.

14. Cabin Safety Task Force (CSTF) CSTF CONCLUSIONS: • - Direct view versus interphone system - In the case of the wide-bodied aircraft identified as having four of the required direct view cabin crew seats (JAR 25.785 (h)(2), not equipped with PA or interphone (JAR OPS 1.695 (b)(3) / 1.690 (b) (4), it was concluded that: • The problem was caused by a lack of coordination in respect of the location of required cabin crew seats, and not by the requirements of direct view. CSTF RECOMMENDATIONS: • CJAA to consider through the JOEB process an actual operational aeroplane cabin evaluation, prior to issue of the initial type certificate. • Flight deck security is an aspect, that as yet, has not been identified as an issue for the direct view criteria for cabin crew.

15. Cabin Safety Task Force (CSTF) CSTF GENERAL VIEW • Operational considerations should be taken into account during the JAR 25 certification process, within a more unified approach to aeroplane certification. - The results of CSTF activity provide demonstration of the need for a wider programme to review the considerable number of JAR 25 requirements that impact on the JAR OPS 1 requirements.

16. Cabin Safety Task Force (CSTF) IS THERE A NEED TO EXTEND THE MANDATE OF THE CSTF? - To be decided by the OST -