Comparing Standards Regulatory Requirements of Safety

  • Uncategorized

COMPARING STANDARDS

0

March 15, 2016

Faculty

A United Nations body called International Civil Aviation Organization is responsible for setting basics international regulations. Thereafter, individual national regulators adopt the regulations in their respective countries in a way that ensures high safety levels. A European Commission body called European Aviation Safety Agency is tasked with setting up safety regulations hence laying down a set of requirements across the entire Europe which governs undertakings like pilot license acquisition and approval of aircraft. Regulatory requirements of safety in the UK Civil Aviation Authority is geared towards the transformation of the CAA into a performance based regulator. This way, the organizations regulated by the authority are expected share common knowledge and data so as to achieve the biggest difference.

Regulation requirements in Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority are supported by a set of rules which include Civil Aviation Act 1988, Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1988, Civil Aviation Regulations 1988, Legislative and non-legislative instruments, and Legislative services contacts. The civil aviation safety authority in Australia has flight crew licensing regulations and also offer flight training to ensure safety.

In India, the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) is responsible for aviation safety. The safety is achieved through the India’s State Safety Programme (SSP) which integrates regulations and activities in the entire aviation system. Also, there are a body, Safety management systems (SMS), which spots safety risks before they grow bigger. However, the safety organization may be replaced with a Civil Aviation Authority (CAA).

Finally, regulatory requirements of safety in the United States (FAA Advisory Circular 120-92A) is based on an SMS framework which can be adhered to by the aviation service providers in the US. However, developing and implementing the SMS is non-obligatory. The SMS is so tied to the System Safety in FAA so that in can be considered and a transformative requirement in the aviation system.

There are slight differences in the safety training regulations for these four nations. In the UK, for instance, training are approved by the European Aviation Safety Agency and pilots licensed by the agency to establish a common ground in terms of quality certifications. Similarly, the Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority also offers flight training to help improve safety. Thus pilots in Australia are required to undergo the flight training before they can be considered suite for participating in any flight activates. However, the United States’ FAA and the India’s Directorate General of Civil Aviation don’t seem to have invested many efforts in setting up training regulations. Theirs is more like an information system relative to training. Averagely, they all seem to consider safety in the aviation system as a top priority hence investing heavily on it.

It is arguable that the UK Civil Aviation Authority and the Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority share similarities in the way they go about the safety issue in the aviation system. This is because they both seem to have invested heavily on offering safety training and approving of the training compared to India and the United States. The Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority more of a rule-based authority above the authorities of all the other three countries. This can seem more pronounced when compared to the United States’ FAA in which the adoption of the SMS is optional in the aviation system, both private and non-private. Thus, in Australia, all flight companies must adhere to all the regulations laid down by the Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority. A similar scenario is also noticeable in the UK where individual countries have common grounds on regulatory policies geared towards improving safety. While the UK Civil Aviation Authority works with CAA, other nations don’t except for the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) which may be replaced by the CAA.