Outcome of the last OPSG meeting. Roma 2, 3, 4 May 2007

1. Outcome of the last OPSG meeting.Roma 2, 3, 4 May 2007 Capt. Claude Godel OST 07-2

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” • for the most advanced, OPSG will also provide a “Pre-RIA” to the EASA rulemaking officers. • Before sending these documents to EASA, the chairman will present them for the last time to OST at the Gatwick meeting. • The OPSG members will remain available (and registered) as experts for the completion of the EASA NPAs linked to these issues but also for any other which are in the scope of our expertise.

3. EASA FORMS • OPSG prepared following EASA forms, for your approval before sending them to “RWPD@easa.eu.int”, : • RFFS • Rwy Incursion prevention • EFB • Separate Runways, new definition • Critical phases of Flight, go-around added • Emergency contact on ground • Approach Ban Point (1000ft AAA as a standard)

4. EASA FORM: Terminology Critical Phases of Flight 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.

5. EASA FORM: Terminology Critical Phases of Flight EASA PRE-RIA Crit. Phases EASA FORM Crit. Phases

6. EASA FORM: RFFS • Reminder (OST 07-1 notes): • The following suggestions were made during OST 07-1, and agreed to: • “Operator’s Operations Manual” to be replaced with “Operations Manual” (AEA). • “Operator’s authority” to be replaced with “the Authority” (AEA). • Editorial amendment to note (e) (NAA Italy). • To avoid duplication of work, the NPA to be transferred to the EASA Inventory, once the agreed amendments have been incorporated. • Once transferred to EASA, the NPA to be prepared for inclusion in IR-OPS and then launched for an accelerated public consultation which should start by the end of 2007. The CRD could then be developed by members of the OPSG although not under the auspices of a JAA SG.

7. EASA FORM for RFFS • Changes since last OST: • editorial changes required by OST: • Paragraph c) was reworded for better understanding. • Note 6 was amended: the possibility for an Authority to authorize or not the use of column 2 was deleted as, with the transfer to EASA, there will be only one Authority remaining (EASA). OPSG, therefore, suggests that table 1, including column 2, becomes the future EASA standard. • It was also agreed that two working papers would be prepared, one by DGAC France and UK CAA, the other by IATA, in order to propose the concept of ex-NPA 59 to the next ICAO OPS Panel.

8. EASA FORM: RFFS EASA PRE-RIA RFFS EASA FORM RFFS

9. EASA FORM:RUNWAY INCURSION PREVENTION • Important editorial work was carried out in order to take account of the FCSG comments and clarify the concepts. The proposed wording is now compact, practical, not “over ruling” and a less onerous regulation than the early draft. • The proposed rule states the two main concepts that should be put in place to increase safety in matters of runway incursion: • A requirement for procedures for taxiing in the operations manual • Among those procedures, the use of the Sterile Cockpit procedure. • The level of detail provided leaves place for some “cultural” flexibility. • Reminder: the proposal, by FCSG, to add taxiing to the critical phases of flight was denied because it would oblige the Cabin Crew to be seated with seatbelt fastened during the whole taxi phase (see JAR OPS 1.310) what OPSG doesn’t consider mandatory.

10. EASA FORM:RUNWAY INCURSION PREVENTION EASA FORM RWY INC.

11. EASA FORM: EFB • Reminder : • There is important work in progress at EASA/JAAT level through the development of TGLs 36 and 26. • OPSG proposes to introduce the hook to those TGLs in EU OPS/JAR OPS 1. • We think there must be a clear requirement for an authorisation before operational use of an EFB . • OPSG didn’t want to interfere in any way with the TGLs: • The requirement and the definition would be in Subpart D • The way to get the authorisation would be explained in TGL 36.

12. EASA FORM: EFB EASAFORM EFB

13. EASA FORM: SEPARATE RUNWAYS • Reminder (OST 07-1 action plan): • TERMINOLOGY & FUEL (New Action) - Improvements to the text to be considered to address comments raised at OST 06-4: • Clarify the Separate Runways definition • The difficulty appears when two “separate runways” are not completely physically separated. • OPSG proposes a clarified definition.

14. EASA FORM: SEPARATE RUNWAYS EASA FORM Separate Runways

15. 1stCONCLUSION Two more to come after the coffee break!

16. EASA FORM: APPROACH BAN POINT New item proposed by OPSG. Present text: 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…”

17. EASA FORM: APPROACH BAN POINT 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.

18. EASA FORM: APPROACH BAN POINT 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.

19. EASA FORM: APPROACH BAN POINT EASA FORM Approach Ban Point PRE RIA Approach Ban Point

20. EASA FORM: EMER CONTACT WHEN PAX ON BOARD 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).

21. EASA FORM: EMER CONTACT WHEN PAX ON BOARD EASA Form Emer Contact

22. CONCLUSION The OPSG members wish all the best to EASA. And remain available for any help or clarification