IAFPA Bulletin Autumn 2011

The magazine for aviation firefighting professionals

IafpaBulletin

training militaryfirefighters

air crash in south africa

organisational security

training arff services in papua

new Guinea

autumn 2011

Holmatro

develops rescue

tools based on the

latest technologies,

which make your

procedures quicker,

safer and easier.

The power

of innovation

Holmatro | Rescue equipment

T +31 (0)162-589200 | [email protected] | www.holmatro.com

Holmatro

develops rescue

tools based on the

latest technologies,

which make your

procedures quicker,

safer and easier.

The power

of innovation

Holmatro | Rescue equipment

T +31 (0)162-589200 | [email protected] | www.holmatro.com

Welcome to the autumn 2011 issue of the IAFPA Bulletin. Within this issue we look at a post crash

analysis of two light aircraft in South Africa and the mobilisation that took place to get the search and rescue plans up and running. We also look at security aspects, with an article on how facial recognition can protect cargo areas and, along with the current state of terminal and organisational security, we cover a number of areas that are in focus today. Another area discussed in this issue is

that of emergency planning. The author of this article explains the reasoning behind corporate risk planning and the consequences of not being prepared. Along with the recent news items, I hope that you enjoy reading through the IAFPA Bulletin.A number of topics have come to the

forefront since the summer issue and

further notice of their development will be given in the IAFPA Newsletter and on the IAFPA website. However, for now these are the key points that we are looking at.To ensure that IAFPA maintains its

renowned high standard of conferences, the IAFPA Board is in negotiation with an international conference organising company which has offered to look after the venues and general logistics of the IAFPA conference organisation. When the final decision is made, an announcement will be posted on the website and IAFPA Members’ Newsletter.Another area we are looking at is

scouting for front cover quality images for the IAFPA Bulletin. We aim to make the front cover of each issue of the IAFPA Bulletin one to remember and would like to invite IAFPA Members to submit their own pictures for consideration. These

images can be of any area that covers airport fire, security and emergency planning. We are lucky enough to have a professional photographer who specialises in aircraft photography to judge the images submitted.Over the next month, the competition

rules will be circulated on the IAFPA Newsletter and on the IAFPA website. Images will be posted on the IAFPA website and within the spring 2012 issue of the IAFPA Bulletin.As we are always looking to improve the

quality and content of the IAFPA Bulletin, it would be beneficial if members could let the editorial team know what areas they would like to see covered within the publication – tell us what you think! Once again I would like to thank the

membership for your continued support.Colin Simpson

IAFPA Chairman

Colin Simpson introduces what’s new in the IAFPA Bulletin and outlines explanatory talks with a third party to help run the IAFPA International Conferences

IAFPA BULLETIN Autumn 2011 3

chairman

Welcome to this issue

Colin Simpson:John Trew:

Peter Stephenson: Colin Murray:

Cletus Packiam: Andrew Werner:

Paulo BarradasPeter McMahon:

ChairmanDirectorDirectorDirectorDirectorDirectorFunctional ManagerWebsite Manager

IAFPA BULLETIN is published four times a year for the International Aviation Fire

Protection Association by FireNet International (www.fire.org.uk)

Copyright 2011 FireNet International Ltd [email protected]

For editorial enquiries, please contact: Emily Hough, Editor: [email protected]

IAFPA BOARD OF DIRECTORS

iafpabULLETIN

4 IAFPA BULLETIN Autumn 2011

SEARCH AND RESCUE FOR DOWNED AIRCRAFTHilary Phillips looks at the multi-skilled SAR operation when two aircraft disappeared in South Africa

PAPUA NEW GUINEAHow Airservices Australia has donated vehicles and training to help the ARFF Services in PNG

10

14

CONTENTs

Cover: US Air Force / Staff Sgt Patrick M

itchell. Contents credits: Wessie W

essels / Dream

stime / ETC / ATSB

NEWS P.6Military exercise halted to help after crash; ultra-light aircraft collides with ferris wheel; anti-collision light mistaken for fire; air race disaster; light aircraft triggers wildfire; ice hockey team among dead in Russia crash

NEWS EXTRA P.8Exciting news about the IAFPA photographic competition

TRAINING MISSION P.14In March this year, Fire Commander Rick Hawksley visited Papua New Guinea with a colleague to deliver training, follow-ing the donation of 11 ARFF vehicles by Airservices Australia

FIREFIGHTING TRAINING P.18A look at how a new simulator is complementing a much-loved tabletop model to train military firefighters

30FUTURE DEMANDS

A look at how shifts in demographics and the

changing nature of aircraft are influencing vehicle design

BIOMETRICSDr Stewart Hefferman weighs up the various biometric solutions available to ensure airport security

LIMPOPO CRASH SAR P.10Off-Road Rescue Unit Operations officer Simon McDonnell reviews with Hilary Phillips the multi-skilled search and rescue operation that unfolded in Mid-August when two light aircraft disappeared in Limpopo en route to Rand Airport in Gauteng, South Africa. The remote crash site was difficult to locate and, when found, inaccessible by road, so recovery teams had to be winched in by helicopter


CONTENTs

RISK MANAGEMENT AND EMERGENCY PLANNINGSo, you think you know how to handle a major event? Ron Lindsay says this is not a subject for the faint-hearted

33

SECURITY INTELLIGENCE P.22Justin Crump says that intelligence capabilities when approaching aviation security are more important than ever, yet the subject is poorly-understood. Here, he outlines some common pitfalls

TERMINAL INSECURITY P.28Chris Yates says that our current security methodology must change with regards to landside buildings at airports

FACIAL RECOGNITION P.30The practical limitations of fingerprinting and iris technology mean that ‘third generation’ face recognition technology is now the leading solution for mass transit and mass identification purposes, argues Dr Steward Hefferman

EMERGENCY PLANNING P.33Ron Lindsay looks at the requirements of a good emergency plan

GIS FOR PERTH AIRPORT P.38Perth Airport in Australia is improving its operations and sustainabilty, as well as minimising the likelihood of potential risks, by using a Geographical Information System, combined with a geographic web application. IAFPA Bulletin reports

A LOOK AT THE ATSB P.40How the ATSB helps to improve aviation safety, both at home and overseas

40

THE ATSB IN PROFILECarl Fellows looks at Australia’s national transport safety investigation agency

SIMULATION TRAININGThe Louis F Garland Fire Training Academy at the Goodfellow Air Force Base, is using a new, high-tech simulator to train firefighters

18

Trenton, search and rescue experts and a team of Transportation Safety Board investigators, was on its way to Resolute Bay for the exercise.

The first search and rescue technician is said to have reached the scene within 15 minutes, followed by more responders and firefighting personnel. Military personnel helped with search and rescue efforts and helped the three injured survivors – a 23-year-old woman, a 48-year-old man and a seven-year-old girl. The C-17 evacuated survivors to Iqaliut. Eight people and four crew were killed in the crash.

CF personnel conducted perimeter security and CF Rangers provided predator control around the site while the RCMP and Transportation Safety Board conducted investigations.

6 IAFPA BULLETIN Summer 2011

ARMY OFFICERS LOST IN PLANE ACCIDENT ANGOLA: A military plane crashed in the central city of Huambo, killing high ranking military officers on board. Six civilians, including two women and two children, also died.

Witnesses said they observed the Embraer-120 turboprop, which was carrying 23 people, flying low over the city before crashing to the ground in a fireball. The pilots and crew survived the crash but

The Minster of Defence, Maj Gen Cândido Pereira Van-Dúnem, said that the loss of such high ranking officers was hard for the Angolan Armed Forces (FAA).

“This is a very sad moment and all of us are shocked by this tragedy,” said the minister while speaking to the press, after paying tribute to the deceased soldiers. The air force has launched an investigation into the cause of the crash.

LIGHT AIRCRAFT TRIGGERS WILDFIRE USA: A light aircraft crashed in rugged terrain, triggering a wildfire that burned through mountains in Blackburn Canyon, south east of Tehachapi, California.

Ninety-four fire appliances with 51 crews and ten bulldozers fought the blaze, supplemented by four air tanker helicopters.

A total of 1,461 personnel were involved in the overall firefighting and recovery operation.

Five houses were destroyed, as well as numerous outbuildings and dozens of vehicles.

The fire burnt a mix of grass, brush, oak and pine trees in steep, rugged terrain with heavy fuel loading. This was exacerbated by low humidity and ‘erratic’ winds, according to the local fire department.

The aircraft involved in the incident was a Cessna 2010 with two people on board; neither survived the crash.

MILITARY EXERCISE HALTS TO HELP AFTER CRASHCANADA: A Boeing 737 carrying 11 passengers and four crew crashed into a hill approximately 1.5km from Resolute Bay Airport runway.

Usually, Resolute Bay’s emergency response comprises two nurses, a Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) officer and the volunteer fire department. But the Canadian military was conducting Operation Nanook nearby. This is an annual exercise involving army, navy and air force elements, as well as other government departments.

More than 1,000 Canadian Forces (CF) were close to the crash site, so exercises relating to Operation Nanook were suspended immediately and personnel responded quickly. A C-17 Globemaster carrying crew from the 436 Transport and Rescue Squadron in

NEWS

RWANDA: The Rwandan Civil Aviation Authority (RCAA) has concluded two weeks of training to teach its staff and other stakeholders with firefighting skills.

Ezechias Rugaza, Head of Kigali International Airport’s Fire Department, said: “We want people who work in the airport premises to have the ability to use fire extinguishers. This puts us on the safer side, just in case fire ever breaks out.” The training involved 227 people and taught them what to do if fire breaks

out, how to use fire extinguishers and how to rescue people. Employees of other companies that operate from the airport also took part.

Rugaza commented that the airport has never had a serious fire, but that it was important for everyone who works at the airport to know what to do in the event of a blaze.

The training programme will be carried out across different departments every month.

FIRE TRAINING AT RWANDAN AIRPORT

Operation N

anook

Military personnel helped the survivors of the crash

IAFPA BULLETIN Summer 2011 7

news

Emergency personnel rescue the pilot of an ultra-light aircraft crashed into a ferris wheel at a local fair near Taree in Australia. Four people were trapped on the wheel after the accident, according to local media

REU

TERS

/ Li

sa Jo

nes AIR RACE DISASTER

USA: Eleven spectators were killed at the Reno National Championship Air Races when a P-51 Mustang lost control and crashed near a hospitality area.

Officials said that many of the 74 people who were injured had sustained life-threatening injuries, with one witnessing likening the aftermath to a war zone.

“People had shrapnel and holes in their head and legs and side. A lot of people were hurt by the flying debris, bolts, and parts of the aeroplane, and sheet metal was flying through... it was just going in every direction at the speed of sound; metal was flying,” the witness said in newspaper interviews.

Medical services set up triage centres on the edge of the runway to prioritise casualties and reports say that a helicopter taking part in the show was pressed into service to transfer the seriously injured to hospitals.

The American Federal Aviation Administration is investigating the incident.

ULTRA-LIGHT COLLIDES WITH FERRIS WHEEL

RUSSIA: Forty-three people, including almost all team members of a top ice hockey club, died when a Yak-42 aircraft crashed upon take-off and caught fire about 2.5km north-west of Tunoshna Airport in the Yaroslavl Region.

The front of the plane crashed into

ICE HOCKEY TEAM AMONG DEAD IN RUSSIA

the River Volga, the tail end remained on dry land. Specialist divers from EMERCOM performed a total of 30 dives during the night to retrieve wreckage and victims. Two people survived the crash and were taken to hospital. In total, 235 people were

involved in dealing with the aftermath of the crash, according to EMERCOM, which also said that 36 of its psychologists were working with the relatives of the dead and injured.

UK: A terminal at Manchester Airport was evacuated for several hours and bomb disposal experts were called in when a suspicious device was discovered in a passenger’s hand luggage.

More than 1,800 passengers and 500 staff were asked to leave the Terminal 1 building and 11 departures were grounded.

Arriving flights and the airport’s other two terminals were unaffected.

A police spokesperson said: “This incident shows that the security measures we have in place are effective and play an important role and when we get a security alert like this we will leave nothing to chance.”

The police later confirmed that the incident had been a false alarm.

TERMINAL EVACUATED IN BOMB SCARE

EMER

COM

of R

ussia


MOBILE COMMSINDIA: An emergency evacuation which injured 25 passengers, four of them seriously, was triggered by a cabin crew member mistaking an anti-collision light for a fire, and was compounded by a series of further errors, including the captain relying on ‘illusionary’ information, an official report has found.

The Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) published its report into the incident, which happened on August 27, 2010, at Mumbai Airport. It involved a B737-800 aircraft with 139 passengers, four cabin crew and two flight crew on board.

The plane was taxiing for take-off, when a cabin crew member thought she saw a fire on the plane’s port engine. The crew member consulted with a colleague, who agreed and informed the captain.

The captain checked with the cabin crew in charge, who also confirmed a blaze, but all the cockpit indications were normal and no fire alarm signals were observed. He also spoke to Air Traffic Control, asking the controller whether he could see the fire on the left side of the plane; the controller confirmed that he could not see any flames.

The captain declared a precautionary

emergency; engines and APU were shut down, and the L2, R1 and R2 chutes were deployed and inflated.

The airport’s ARFF services were deployed, but no foam was discharged as there was no fire or smoke.

During the evacuation, 25 passengers were injured, four of them seriously, with multiple fractures. The evacuated passengers and crew were taken to the main fire station by coach, ambulance and safety vehicle. The injured passengers were given first aid at the airport, then taken to nearby hospitals for treatment.

The official report emphasises throughout that nobody involved smelled or saw smoke in the cabin, and that: “There was no actual fire in the incident.”

The flickering red light that the cabin crew had observed was the aircraft’s anti-collision light, which flashes red-orange.

The report concluded that cabin crew were not trained adequately with regards to certain evacuation procedures, that crew should be better trained in noticing the anti-collision lights and that the cockpit crew lacked situational awareness in the incident.

ANTI-COLLISION LIGHT MISTAKEN FOR FIRE

AUSTRALIA: C4i recently created an IP-based, turnkey solution for a major Australian rail transport organisation. The Mobile Incident Response Trailer was commissioned to provide incident response personnel with a transportable, integrated communication structure.

The system includes one operator position with the capability to integrate communications from six different radios into a single headset. At the heart of the design is C4i’s SwitchplusIP system – packaged into a rugged, weather-resistant trailer that is easily towed by a vehicle to the site of an incident.

Built to cater for areas lacking in radio coverage, the Mobile Incident Response Trailer can be set up anywhere to act as a ‘communication hub’ at the site of an emergency. Using the HMI touch-screen Operator Console Unit, the operator may converse with on-site technical experts using new SIP mobile phones; users of existing Motorola radios; or the train driver in need.

The highly transportable system can make and receive telephony calls over Telstra’s 3G network, in addition to transmitting and receiving audio from all radios simultaneously. Features include wireless PTT functionality, configurable operator roles and individual operating preferences, such as volume control. With radio-radio and radio-telephony patching, C4i says this system demonstrates its cutting-edge work in the interoperable communication arena.

AVIATION PHOTOS: HAVE YOU GOT WHAT IT TAKES?

WORLD: The IAFPA Bulletin is running a photographic competition, to be judged by a professional aviation photographer. Winning entries will be featured on the website and the front cover: keep checking the IAFPA website www.iafpa.org.uk for the rules and prizes.

NEWS


UK: Parsons Brinckerhoff, the international engineering consultancy, has appointed leading industry specialist Dr Nicole Hoffmann as UK Principal Fire Engineer for its transport business, covering rail and road infrastructure, airports and ports.

Dr Hoffman has over 25 years in fire engineering and 15 years consultancy working for Mott MacDonald, Arup and, most recently, Kingfell. Her work will be predominantly focused on supporting UK activities, although she will also be a valuable resource to the company’s extensive global transport activities, including its internationally-recognised tunnel ventilation team.

Dr Hoffmann has been responsible for developing fire and evacuation strategies for a wide range of transport projects in the UK and internationally. In London and the south east she has produced fire strategies for numerous London Underground projects and mainline stations including Kings Cross, Victoria, Liverpool Street, London Bridge, Euston and Blackfriars. She also developed an integrated fire safety study for Crossrail. Dr Hoffmann was instrumental in the development of the industry standard STEPS model (Simulation of Transient Evacuation and Pedestrian movements) which she initially helped design and develop. The programme is capable of simulating both normal and emergency evacuation modes to allow the analysis of ‘what if ’ scenarios.

Dr Hoffmann is a Chartered Engineer and a Chartered Mathematician. She is also a Member of the Institute of Fire Engineers (MIFireE) and a Fellow of the Institute of Mathematics and its Applications (FIMA). For the last three years, she has been a committee member for the UK Railway Industry Fire Association.

NEW APPOINTMENT

newsOFFICIAL REPORT BLAMES FOG AND NAVIGATOR

RUSSIA: The Interstate Aviation Committee has said that the navigator of a Tu-134 which crashed in Petrozavodsk had: “Conducted the flight in a state of light alcoholic intoxication.”

The crash happened when the plane struck trees then crashed while trying to land in fog, killing 47 people (see IAFPA Bulletin Summer 2011 for incident report).

The investigators said that the aircraft crashed because the crew failed to abort the landing, even though the pilot could

not see the landing lights – the cockpit recording shows the navigator encouraged the pilot to land, reassuring him that he would: “Bring you in just right.”

He failed, however, to tell the pilot to look out of the windscreen and search for markers at 140 metres, and did not warn him when he reached decision height. Seconds later, the plane skimmed treetops and crashed.

The report found that the “carelessness” of the navigator and the heavy fog contributed to the crash.

INDIA: The Times of India (TOI) has reported on a growing issue with an aircraft that has lain abandoned for 20 years, just 90 metres from the runway at Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar International Airport.

The newspaper’s website says that the Director General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) and Bureau of Civil Aviation Security (BCAS) have raised objection to the presence of the aircraft on numerous occasions.

The plane made an emergency landing at the airport after developing engine

problems on July 21, 1991. According to TOI, the aircraft has remained there ever since and its owner has never paid parking charges. Plans to move it and convert it into a restaurant, or to use it for educational purposes, have fallen through.

“The aircraft has been abandoned at the airport and a case is pending in the Bombay high court,” an official from the airport operator, Mihan India Ltd, told TOI. The company’s chief operating officer said: “We also want it shifted and would soon request the court to allow us to do so.”

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com

ABANDONED AIRCRAFT IS CAUSING CONCERN

The aircraft struck the treeline then crashed while trying to land in fog

EMER

COM

of R

ussia


Off-Road Rescue Unit Operations Officer Simon McDonnell reviews with Hilary Phillips the multi-skilled search and rescue operation that unfolded in mid-August when two light aircraft disappeared in Limpopo en route to Rand Airport in Gauteng, South Africa

Incident report

Flying in formation in marginal weather, two Piaggio P166 Albatross aircraft left the Tzaneen Air Show for Rand

Airport before lunch on Sunday, August 14,” McDonnell said. “Among the seven passengers aboard ZU MMI and the six aboard ZS NJX were well-known aviation personalities and family members of competitors at the air show; three were children – a 14-year-old girl and sisters aged nine and seven.”

When the aircraft failed to arrive as scheduled, four of South Africa’s specialist emergency units were mobilised immediately to bring their strengths to bear: Search and Rescue SA; the volunteer 4x4 Off Road Rescue Unit (ORRU), which has an affiliated K9 unit if required; and two volunteer Mountain Club of South Africa SAR teams, Gauteng and Western Cape.

Despite deteriorating visibility, several pilots who had attended the air show returned to Tzaneen to join the search until fading light impeded further efforts.

A trauma centre was set up at Rand Airport and counselling made available for the relatives of those in the missing planes. A mobile forensics unit was also

placed on standby.Some family members opted to wait

for news at Rand Airport overnight; others left for Tzaneen, where rescue operations were under way and the search was to be resumed at 05:00hrs the following morning.

“At 15:45hrs on Sunday afternoon I received a call from the Aeronautical Rescue Co-ordination Centre (ARCC) advising that the two aircraft flying from Tzaneen to Rand Airport were overdue,”

continued McDonnell. “I immediately called Santjie White

of ARCC, who was still driving back to Johannesburg from the air show from which the missing aircraft had departed, to advise that ORRU would put together a team and get to Tzaneen to assist with search operations.

“Calls were also made to and received from the Mountain Club of South Africa (MCSA) in Gauteng, which had been alerted to the incident; they requested

Search and rescue for light aircraft in Limpopo

Low cloud over the kranse (precipitous cliff faces) and thick vegetation between them hampered visibility and access. Dark scars indicate the intense fires at both crash sites (indicated by red arrows)

Wessie Wessels

Incident report


assistance with conveying their team and equipment to Tzaneen.”

At 16:01hrs a Code Yellow was issued via mobile phone and the vehicles of 14 ORRU members were made available immediately. As visibility around Tzaneen had not improved, the most practical plan was to leave Gauteng very early the next morning, in order to arrive at first light.

A Code Orange sent at 16:38hrs advised that Team 1 would include T68

Simon McDonnell (Field Team Leader), G05 Terry Spencer (ORRU chairman), and members V72 Andy, H42 Bert with M29 Michael riding shotgun, V93 Dean (in a dual ORRU/MSAR role), M95 Chris, V58 Russ, T46 Ian, M18 Luke, V99 Wynand, W61 Gideon, W77 Bruce, and W38 Paul. Team members were to muster at the Lonehill Fire Station to depart for Tzaneen at 01:00hrs.

For some volunteers the Monday morning deployment altered the situation;

ORRU members with work commitments were obliged to amend their availability, leaving McDonnell with a final team of nine vehicles.

At 21:06hrs on Sunday evening a Code Red went out advising that H42 Bert, T68 Simon, W77 Bruce, W38 Paul, T46 Ian and V72 Andy would collect the Mountain Club volunteers and their kit from Lonehill and then depart in convoy to rendezvous with G05 Terry, V58 Russ and W61 Gideon in Pretoria.

After encountering heavy mist in the Magoebaskloof area, the teams arrived in Tzaneen at 06:15hrs on Monday, August 15, where they were met by Incident Commander and Search Co-ordinator, Eddie Vorster, who updated them on the situation: that two Albatross aircraft flying in formation had taken off at 10:20hrs the previous day for Rand Airport, Johannesburg.

The last radar plot and communication with the aircraft had been at 10:36hrs, when the pilots mentioned that they were to the left of their flight plan.

While members of the ORRU team set up their incident trailer, the team leaders from various rescue groups, including local residents who knew the terrain, met to plan their input. Rain, low cloud and poor visibility still hindered an aerial search, so the ground teams were deployed to check areas of high probability, identified from eye-witness reports and intelligence gathered since the previous day.

At the Joint Operations Centre (JOC) G05 Terry, who was assisting T68 Simon, was tasked at one point with setting up ground-to-air communication as the JOC base station was giving problems. H42 Bert, who was leading the ground teams, kept the JOC informed of their movements frequently by mobile phone, as radio communication came and went in the mountainous terrain.

Throughout Monday more personnel arrived in Tzaneen to assist with aircraft, vehicles and local knowledge. By mid-morning the pilots of several helicopters, including a SAAF Oryx and two fixed wing aircraft, were briefed and ready to join the search as soon as the weather lifted. These later provided relays to the JOC from both the ground

Search and rescue for light aircraft in Limpopo


Incident report

and air teams, but some 24 hours after the disappearance, SAR operations remained hampered by the weather, which prevented thorough searches of unreachable high-probability areas.

The search continued in areas that were accessible on foot, however. In the Wolkberg (Cloud Mountain) district local residents reported the presence of aircraft, but not all the reports could be verified.

Conflicting reports of two aircraft flying in formation were then received by the JOC, which also caused confusion. Both reports were followed up and it emerged that two Pitt Specials had taken off shortly after the two Albatross.

By late afternoon on Monday no wreckage had been found. Ground teams returned to the JOC, track logs were downloaded and plans to resume the search at first light the following day were confirmed.

ORRU members H42 Bert, M29 Michael, W77 Bruce, W38 Paul, W61 Gideon, V58 Russ and G05 Terry had to return to Johannesburg for business commitments on the Tuesday, but Bert and Terry were willing to head straight back to Tzaneen after their meetings to continue searching with the team

members who had remained.At 16:15hrs on Monday a second

Code Yellow was sent, advising of the continuing search. In Johannesburg M95 Chris and M18 Luke responded that they were available and would leave at 02:00hrs on Tuesday to arrive in Tzaneen by 07:00hrs.

At this point no Code Red was sent via bulk SMS as only two members were available; T68 Simon issued it verbally.

“On the Tuesday morning we awoke to steady rainfall and, once again, things did not look good for a search by air,” says McDonnell. “After an FTL briefing at 06:30hrs, ground teams were again organised and deployed just as the weather cleared sufficiently for a SAPS police helicopter to get airborne. Then, at 08:10hrs we heard on their radio: ‘Got it … confirmed … we have the site.’

“Tragically, still in formation, both aircraft appeared to have flown into a krans – a precipitous cliff face – and exploded upon impact, leaving very little hope for the survival of those on board.

All teams were immediately ordered back to the JOC and Ops began to transport relevant personnel to the crash site. Access by road was impossible, but

four-wheeled vehicles could get to within half a kilometre or so of the crash site via the Orrie-Baragwanath Pass. The problem then was that the remaining distance included a difficult 200-metre climb to the summit above the site, which was not an option.

“Eventually a small area was identified as a feasible helicopter landing zone and forensic experts, Civil Aviation Authority staff and police officials were ferried in for the initial crash site assessment. A Cape Town team from the Mountain Club of South Africa took over from the Gauteng team and assisted the police with the recovery of the victims, but at that hour were still on their way to Tzaneen via the Swartkops SAAF base in Pretoria,” he continued.

On Tuesday, August 16, at 10:15hrs the ORRU team was finally stood down. Before leaving members handed equipment for the expected MCSA team to the JOC for safekeeping and, at 12:30hrs, began the long haul home. Once back in Johannesburg, the Code Green was issued at 18:46hrs.

Team Leader Simon McDonnell (L) confers with Terry Spencer at the Joint Ops Trailer

MCSA volunteers abseiled down the rock face to the right-hand crash site, partially hidden in dense vegetation

Hilary Phillips is a regular contributor to IAFPA Bulletin and Crisis Response Journal

Hol

den

Kro

g Jaco van Zyl


Incident report

Holden K

rog

Recovery personnel sift through debris at the left hand crash site – the blackened areas are evidence of the intense fires that occurred upon impact

Further comment

Aeronautical Rescue Co-ordination Centre (ARCC) spokesperson Johnny

Smit, Manager: Air Traffic Services, reported that all standard procedures were followed immediately the two aircraft were confirmed missing.

“From the Sunday we’d had an idea as to where the planes might be located and this proved correct,” he said. “On the Tuesday morning we searched for only half an hour and, as feared, they had flown into a mountain. The pilots may have tried to gain altitude to fly above the cloud.

“Just after 08:00hrs the wreckage was located at an altitude of 1,570 metres on the Mamotswiri peak in the Lekgalametse mountains northeast of Tzaneen. The two planes were still in formation when they crashed. No ‘Mayday’ was broadcast beforehand and the occupants of both are thought to have died on impact.”

Joint Operations Centre head, Hannes Steyn, confirmed that the aircraft were found some 100 metres apart. The remote crash site being inaccessible by road, the recovery teams had to be winched in by helicopter.

The aircraft appeared to have caught fire on impact, said CAA spokesperson, Phindiwe Gwebu: “Investigators collected what was needed from the wreckage and this will be tested forensically in Pretoria. The investigation could take from six to 12 months.”

Those aboard ZU MMI were pilot Brian Gruar and passengers Marrion Anderson, Maddison and Alexandra Doak, Tess Spence, Louise Warden and Kevin Woolacott. In ZS NJX were pilot Peter Gildenhuys, and passengers Stuart and Peter van Oldenburg, Frans Dely, Marietjie de Witt, and Linda Pierce. Dely was a well-known Johannesburg aviation photographer.


Airservices Australia’s Aviation Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) Service has provided 11 surplus firefighting

vehicles to Papua New Guinea (PNG) through an overseas aid programme. The vehicles were identified as being surplus to requirements as part of ongoing upgrades to ARFF equipment nationally.

The introduction to service of new vehicles freed up a number of still very capable Austral Trident Mk5 and Mk6 ultra-large fire vehicles for transfer to PNG in March 2011.

In December 2010, ARFF Services Fire Commander Andrew Firman travelled to Lae in PNG to conduct a training needs analysis. The facilities at Nadzab airport were reviewed to ensure that a successful training course could be delivered. All areas of the airport were inspected, including the fire station, mechanical workshop and admin areas.

Fire Commander Andrew Firman and I were selected on behalf of ARFF to travel to PNG to deliver the initial vehicle operator and driver training to firefighting personnel from various airports located around the country.

Residents of PNG rely heavily on the aviation industry for travel around the island. This is mainly down to the inadequate road infrastructure, owing to the spectacular mountain ranges and valleys, which make building roads a virtually impossible task in most outlying areas of the country.

Departing Launceston on March 28, 2011, I flew to Brisbane where I stayed overnight. I then departed for Port Moresby the next morning and met up with Andrew Firman, from Cairns ARFF and Phil Irvine, PNG and Pacific Relations Manager. Phil drove us to the control tower on the other side of the airport. The journey through the streets

The main aim of the training was to develop competence and skill to operate the vehicles safely

and effectivelyParade at Papua New Guinea’s

Lae International Airport

Training

DONATION AND TRAINING IN PAPUA NEW GUINEA


was rather sobering; the living conditions of the indigenous people are of a very low standard.

Later in the day we caught the connecting flight in a Dash 8 100 to Lae International Airport, which is 300 kilometres due north of Port Moresby – a relatively unnerving flight.

After arriving at Lae we picked up our

luggage from the baggage collection area and I was amazed at the condition of the terminal, which was built during World War II and does not seem to have had any improvements or renovations since. However, the terminal was neat and tidy, a testament to the cleanliness and pride of the employees working at the airport.

We took up residence at a very secure Lae International Hotel, a paradise within razor wire adorned 12-foot-high fencing protected by 24-hour guards with dogs.

The first day at the fire station was taken up with getting to know the trainees, organising the lesson room and arranging suitable vehicles to conduct the training (mainly ones without a flat battery). Initially Andrew and I were to train six candidates who would then impart their knowledge to the firefighters at airports where the vehicles were going to be located. The number of candidates grew to nine, then 15 and finally we

DONATION AND TRAINING IN PAPUA NEW GUINEA

In March this year, Fire Commander Rick Hawksley visited Papua New Guinea with a colleague to deliver training, following the donation of 11 firefighting vehicles by Airservices Australia’s ARFF Service

Training

Papua New Guinea

Population 6,187,591

Total airports 562

With paved runways 21 With unpaved runways 541Heliports 2

Airservices Australia donated 11

vehicles to PNG


found there were 21 students eagerly waiting to be educated. After managing to eliminate the initial teething problems with the additional numbers and organising the classroom, the in-depth training soon got under way.

The main aim of the course was to develop competence and skill to drive the vehicles in a safe manner, including the systematic, safe and efficient control of all vehicle functions, such as off-road driving and effective management of hazardous situations under operational conditions. During the course each candidate was supplied with a workbook which contained all of the necessary theoretical information to drive and operate the vehicles successfully. Copies of emergency procedures and getting to work procedures were also supplied.

Along with the 11 vehicles, equipment provided included mechanical maintenance manuals, various spare

parts, spare wheels and tyres. A large range of ancillary equipment, hoses and disc cutters was also included in the shipment.

The main areas of training the candidates were exposed to over the ensuing six days included;

• Introduction to Ultra Large Fire Fighting Vehicles Mk 5 and Mk 6;

• Vehicle support systems;• Pre-use daily vehicle checks;• The delivery of selected theory

and practical components of Drive Vehicles under Operational Conditions PUAVEH001B (Public Safety Module);

• Delivery of theory and practical component of Mk 5 & Mk 6 Vehicle Operator Rating; and

• Delivery of theory and practical component of Mk 5 & Mk 6 Vehicle Driver Rating.

Along with the theory and practical

components relating to the vehicles, training was provided in getting to work with hose lines from all deliveries, consolidation of the trainees’ firefighting skills and increasing their knowledge in fireground awareness.

PNG firefighters are an open, giving and proud group, eager to please, committed to learning and passionate in their contribution towards the outcomes of the course.

Training on the fireground

The fire station

training


The new vehicles will go a long way to assist with the provision of a professional service to the flying public at the main airports located around PNG.

The feedback received from all candidates included their appreciation for the assignment of the surplus vehicles from Airservices ARFF, the delivery of the operator and driver training and how much they enjoyed consolidating their basic firefighting skills during the course.

The last day was taken up with cleaning all available vehicles and arranging them in a line on the apron next to a marquee, which was home to a lunch for PNG Airport Corporation dignitaries and representatives from Airservices and ARFF. The dignitaries were greeted with dance and music performed by local people in very colourful traditional dress.

Finally, in July, Andrew Firman and Steve Lamb travelled to Lae to provide the same training to more of PNG’s aviation firefighters. Once again they delivered the same course content, which was greatly received.

I would like to take this opportunity to express my gratitude and appreciation for the opportunity to travel to PNG to help conduct this training. This particular project not only provided me with the experience of operating in a different country, but also the chance to make a lot of new friends.

Many thanks go to all the participants on the training course:

Miha Kauri; Sam Silas; Kawai Tadap; Ted Usonie; Jim Maipson; David Wengai; Peter Urim; Jeffery Rubin; Martin Yawising; Bilei Gubuk; Alisi Gidisa; Gawan Hagena; Michael Jack; Simon Matana; James Waiwai; Vincent Kifas; Desmond Mackay; Hasel Pom; Joseph Uin; Gaogeng Tasong; and Leo Nawi.

Finally, I would like to thank the following people who made the PNG vehicle project such a great success: Greg Russell, Airservices CEO; Andrew Rushbrook, ARFF General Manager; Peter Smith, Chief Fire Officer; David Bath; Paul Dawson; Phil Irvine; Alistair Hodgson; Mark Best; Andrew Firman; Steve Lamb; and Trish Hayter.

Rick Hawksley is Fire Commander, ARFF Services, Launceston Airport, Australia

Theory and practical training in the classroom

The author and his colleague arrived in a Dash-8

training


Since 1993, the Louis F Garland Fire Training Academy located at the 312th Training Squadron at Goodfellow Air Force Base

(GAFB) in San Angelo, Texas, USA, has trained thousands of firefighters across all military branches of the Department of Defense (DoD), including Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, and Civil Service, as well as fire protection specialists from numerous foreign countries. Based on the extensive and stringent training programme mandated by the DoD and implemented by the instructional staff, the Academy is considered by many to be the best fire training establishment in the world at preparing mission-ready emergency responders.

Academy graduates are equipped to command and control incidents requiring fire suppression, hazard mitigation, rescue and management of CBRNE or HazMat incidents that result from accidents or terrorism. All fire training programmes are built upon the fundamental objectives of preventing or minimising injury, loss of life, and damage to property or the environment.

Recently, the Academy installed the Advanced Disaster Management Simulator (ADMS) which is expected to elevate the level of instruction offered to trainees even further, upholding the commitment to world-class training and preparedness. The system acts as a 3D virtual reality ‘training stage’ in order to formulate, practise, assess and enhance

the response plans which will be relied upon in a real life incident.

The acquisition will be used in conjunction with the well-loved Norma Brown tabletop model, in service since 1979 and which was commissioned by the US Department of Defense to train firefighters in the military

According to retired Master Sergeant and current DoD fire academy instructor TC Sirmans: “The DoD has been using the Norma Brown tabletop model for incident command training for over three decades. The incorporation of the ADMS system will enable us to train more realistically, more effectively, and more economically than ever before.”

Fundamental limitations with tabletop training methodologies exist, both at the

THE TRANSFORMATION OF ‘NORMA BROWN’

Lori Bozenbury and Diane Merritts look at the new high-tech training method that the US Department of Defense is using to train firefighters in the military

training


Garland Academy, as well as at civilian training institutions. For example, using a tabletop model does not allow trainees to see the incident unfolding. Cotton balls are used to help visualise a fiery crash, and matchbox cars and toy planes are moved around by hand, all requiring vivid imaginations on the part of the trainees to elicit responses and decisions that would mimic a real-incident.

The simulation chosen by Goodfellow is an exact replica of the fictitious Norma Brown Air Force base, with runways, hangars, outbuildings and an air traffic control tower. Virtual resources include what would be typically seen in an airport environment, such as specialised crash trucks. Military specific aircraft were modelled, including an F-16, C-130 and

C-5, which can encounter a multitude of emergency situations. Students will be able to prepare for low-frequency events which are typically difficult or impossible to train for, such as a catastrophic aviation accident. Because of the high-consequence potential of these events, aircraft rescue and firefighting training is also a critical component of military fire training.

“With ADMS, when you see a pilot in the plane and people in jeopardy, you’re going to start screaming for resources and it’s going to force you to prioritise the objectives of life, safety and property. The simulation is going to put our trainees under real stress; they are going to see the consequences of their decisions and actions immediately. Unlike tabletop

training, students won’t need to imagine what would happen, they’ll see firsthand if it was a good decision or a bad one. That’s the kind of realistic training that will make them better prepared for a real-world event,” says Master Sergeant Sirmans.

Simulation is now a standard DoD training methodology and is expected to enhance the training process, improve on-scene performance and reliability, and increase the capabilities of all DoD Fire and Emergency Services personnel.

According to Sirmans, the new training system will meet or exceed the required DoD training criteria and bring a host of additional benefits to trainees.

With fire training, repeated training provides the critical experience

training

A C-5 and command vehicle (with F16s and C-130s in the

background) from the Goodfellow AFB simulation project


necessary to mitigate a crisis situation successfully. Repetitiveness also helps in desensitising trainees to catastrophic scenes, a necessary component of effective response activities. “The more realistically you train, the more often you train, the more confident and proficient you become,” says Sirmans. “And the integration of the simulation system into our curriculum will bring our fire training programme to a whole new level.”

When selecting a simulation system, Sirmans states that the requirements were not only true-to-life visuals, but also the capability of reacting to the trainees’ actions and commands realistically. “The simulator needed to be ‘smart’,” he explains. “With ADMS, what happens on screen is based on physics and artificial intelligence; if the trainees don’t use the proper agent, the fire won’t go out, and if they don’t attend to the casualties, they’ll die. That’s a powerful learning tool, and it gives an immediate, objective insight into whether their decision was right or wrong. We would much rather have our trainees make the wrong decisions in the simulator than on-scene in a crisis situation.”

Initially they plan on implementing the simulator within their higher-level Fire Officer II courses, which are aimed primarily at turning firefighters into

incident commanders. The simulator will be utilised eight hours a day for the last week of each course so that trainees can practise what they have learnt, and put their knowledge to the test.

“It’s all about the Command Statement,” Sirmans adds.“If they can’t communicate effectively to other firefighters, responders, and operations centre staff what is happening, what they need and what to do, they won’t be able to mitigate the situation successfully. I truly believe that once ADMS is fully integrated into the Fire Officer II curriculum, its usage will be significantly expanded into many of the other training programmes offered at the Academy. I can especially see how it is suited for, and will become an integral component of, the National Incident Management System (NIMS) courses that we offer.”

Because the Fire Academy offers both on-site and mobile training, the simulator chosen is transportable. According to Sirmans, the Academy currently lacks a specific mobile Incident Command training tool. “With budgetary cutbacks affecting everyone today, taking our system on the road will allow us to actually save dollars while offering better training. It will be more cost effective for us to send two instructors to train

12 people internationally than it would be to bring 12 individuals to Texas for training.”

Colonel Denny Rea, USAF retired, who serves as a senior consultant and project manager for Adayana Government group and who has worked closely with this project, says: “As a former F-16 pilot, I’ve been on the other side of the firemen’s heroic efforts during various in-flight and aircraft emergencies. The 312th Training Squadron instructors at the DoD Fire Academy now have the mobile capability to train more firemen and improve the skills of DoD firemen around the world.”

Lori Bozenbury and Diane Merritts are associates with ETC Simulation, a division of ETC, and the developers of the Advanced Disaster Management Simulator (ADMS). Lori’s focus is on the training component of the Emergency Management cycle, and finding the balance between agency requirements, local objectives and industry wide challenges. Diane is interested in the best ways to improve communication and foster a collaborative environment for professionals, with a special interest in maximising the benefits realised by ADMS users. For more information about the Louis F Garland Fire Academy, visit www.goodfellow.af.mil; for more information about the Advanced Disaster Management Simulator, visit www.etcsimulation.com

training

F-16s and an ARFF vehicle from the Goodfellow AFB simulation project

CONSTRUCTIONFIRE SAFETY

FireNet International Ltdwww.fra-hosting.com

+44 (0)208 1661690

FireNet International

Ltd offers unrivalled

experience in the

control of fire risks

associated with

construction sites, and

has a proven record at

one of Europe’s biggest

construction sites:

Terminal 5 at Heathrow,

UK.

With over 150 collective

years of experience

in fighting fire and

fire risk, we have a

wealth of knowledge

and understanding

of fire growth and

development, coupled

with wide access to a

team of dedicated Fire

Safety Advisors.


It has been my experience over the last few years that intelligence in corporate organisations is regarded in one of two ways: either as a

dirty word, or as a panacea to all security problems. Of course neither approach is correct, and the sad truth is that whatever the approach, the subject of intelligence itself is generally misunderstood. Government is better equipped to understand the principles, but even there the very size and scale of the apparatus available, coupled with the extraordinary range of demands upon it, can pose significant operational problems.

Why worry? Well, intelligence is, of necessity, the lifeblood of risk

Towards intelligent security?management – and we currently exist in a very serious and risky threat environment. An intelligence-led approach allows for the more efficient use of assets to mitigate existing risks, and permits the early identification of emerging ones. It also allows us to understand when risks are diminishing and enables agility in response, offering significant savings in terms of effort and ‘friction’. This is particularly important in the aviation sector, where this friction has very real costs. For example, one in ten passengers in a recent survey indicated that they no longer enjoyed flying as a result of the threat and our current blanket security measures, while

nearly all of us have expressed frustration at some aspect of airport security in the past. Freight faces similar concerns, with the scanning of all cargo imposing significant delays and costs on both users and suppliers of services.

Furthermore, in the UK at least, the role of intelligence – and the requirement for intelligence-led processes across a wider variety of enterprises – is likely to increase following the outcome of the current Department for Transport consultation on better regulation for aviation security (www.dft.gov.uk/consultations/dft-2011-21). The desire is to move to an outcome focused, risk-based approach, which is intended to

Organisational security

Towards intelligent security? Impending changes in the way we approach aviation security are

likely to make the implementation of

effective corporate intelligence capabilities

more important than ever – yet this

remains a subject that is generally

poorly understood. Justin Crump, CEO

of the specialist security intelligence consultancy Sibylline

Ltd, shares his thoughts on best

practice and common errors


improve agility and speed of response. Under the proposal, it will be the job of the Department to set overall requirements based on the level and nature of threat at the time, advised by the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre (JTAC) and other government agencies. Industry will then be able to implement processes that deliver specified security outcomes rather than having to follow detailed rules, as is currently the case.

To some extent the current arrangement has worked to stifle the development of a security intelligence function in aviation companies, since they are, in essence, protected by the government umbrella. While under

this proposal the UK Government will continue to supply a degree of intelligence, this will still be largely related to a very specific (albeit critical) area of operations, viz terrorist activity. To think that this is enough is to ignore the many other risks to any enterprise involved in the aviation industry at this time. For example, competition is encouraging carriers to adopt newer, potentially more dangerous routes; corruption and bribery is being taken increasingly seriously; the insider threat is a serious concern; many parts of the world are becoming increasingly risky, while the consequences of failing in the duty of care to staff are more and

In a recent survey one in ten passengers indicated that they no longer enjoyed flying as a result of the terrorist threat and the current blanket security measures

Picture: Leila Akhundova / Dreamstime



more severe; industrial action is on the rise; corporate espionage is growing, especially in the form of cyber activity; market shocks are having dramatic effects, particularly as regards fuel prices; and single-issue activism is posing an increasing danger to the aviation sector, both in scale and in severity.

With all of this in mind, the aviation sector will more or less have to fall in line with the approach taken by other industries. For example in financial services, the requirement for a security intelligence function to cover all of the risks mentioned above is well understood, with more and more firms implementing this capability. This activity has proceeded despite cutbacks in staff elsewhere, reflecting once again how intelligence makes corporate security more efficient and indeed more relevant, since intelligence that speaks to the heart of corporate risks is an invaluable decision support tool for senior management. The oil and gas sector provides a similar example.

Security intelligence analysts in both industries receive a degree of official guidance on threats and risks, but it is their job to network and liaise to gain a wider understanding of issues pertinent to their particular organisation and translate this into a ‘so what’. They are also essential for horizon scanning and in this regard I have encouraged many of the analysts who I have worked with to develop what you might call ‘enterprise awareness’. In essence, this means having a clear picture of what the organisation itself is undertaking, where and how, in order to ensure that security can remain as relevant as possible. This can include being responsible for metrics, surveys and internal liaison, all of which falls in line with a critical component of the DfT proposal – the implementation of effective and accountable security management systems.

Similarly, it is robust systems and approaches that underlie the creation and use of intelligence and I think it is worth outlining some of the main aspects involved, in the hope that this may increase understanding of how involved the process really is, and

provide guidance for those considering implementing their own solution. Let’s start with the aim of security intelligence, which is to offer the following:

• Identification of threats;• Early warning;• Generation of understanding;• Triggering of pre-emptive

mitigation;• Delivery of efficiencies and

improvements in the focus of assets; and

• Prevention or recovery of lossIt is also worth defining what we

mean by the term intelligence before we bandy it around any further! Put simply, intelligence is a body of knowledge generated in support of a manager’s decision-making process. This reflects the one of the most fundamental things to understand – data, information and intelligence are not interchangeable terms, but rather they exist in what we call the ‘information hierarchy’.

This distinction is fundamental, as the whole aim of the intelligence process is to synthesise and analyse data and information in order to generate understanding. This happens through a continuous and highly involved process that we call the intelligence cycle.

There are various different conceptual models that you may see around and about, but they all share the same

fundamental features. There is a requirement for direction (identify the needs and manage the process); collection (find the raw information or data of potential relevance); analysis (sift, synthesise, hypothesise and draw actionable knowledge from the pool of data); and dissemination (delivery in a timely fashion to interested recipients). At its heart, intelligence should answer a particular question or concern, and in corporate life that often means it should be linked to a particular risk (with an auditable process for noting the intelligence requirements raised and recording the actions resulting from the analysis). It must also be timely, accurate and relevant, and the latter is an area where those who rely on generic product from external providers can suffer particularly.

To work at its best the cycle requires a minimum of three people – a client and process manager, a researcher and an analyst. It can, of course, be done with less, but this arrangement allows functions to run in parallel, offering maximum efficiency. This is particularly important when it comes to a crisis, when information is continually emerging as the analyst is making sense of it all. Having more people involved also allows for better analysis, readier identification of emerging threats and gives resilience.

Data

Information

Knowledge

Understanding

Processing

Cognition

Understanding

Signals/Messages

Formatted, Translated, Plotted, Compared

Evaluated, Integrated, Collated, Analysed

Figure 1: The Information Hierarchy



It is also worth noting that the skill sets are different, which can be important when building a team from scratch.

The sources available are also worthy of careful thought. Enterprises have a huge amount of information at their disposal and sometimes the best sources are internal, for example the feed from SCADA systems or access records. External liaison is a key role for the corporate intelligence analyst, and the judicious commissioning of reports from qualified external experts can add critical insight (especially with regard to less straightforward problems). Of course, these days open source information (often from the internet and social media) is prevalent and offers a tremendous, albeit potentially distracting, resource. In this environment rigorous control and assessment of sources becomes highly important, the more so as it is comparatively easy to find almost any fact to back up a particular argument, enhancing an analyst’s potential bias. This is yet another good reason to split the research and analysis function, since it offers a useful sense check.

Finally, dissemination is key to ensuring action. If the intelligence produced speaks to specific concerns, and is timely, accurate and relevant, it will be digested avidly. The issue can be getting initial buy-in from a potentially sceptical

audience and this takes careful effort. The worse result is to produce something that is not read, since this merely becomes a hostage to fortune. The changing needs of the target audience therefore require continuous assessment, as does the method of dissemination. There is also a balance to be struck as regards to secrecy versus the wider need for information across the organisation. For a final point on dissemination, though, think on this: How many of us receive email newsletters and updates that we never read, or get notes requiring passwords that we never access as a result?

By necessity this has been a whistle-stop tour of what is a most involved subject. The psychology of analysis alone fills volumes, although thankfully you do not need fully to get to grips with this to produce decent output! The most useful thing I can now do is leave those interested in implementing

a more advanced intelligence function with a list of the most common pitfalls. On our courses, I call these the diseases of managing corporate intelligence. Some reinforce points already made; others touch on new areas; I trust that you will find all of them useful as we move towards more intelligent and agile security.

Common diseases of managing corporate intelligence are as follows.

Confusing raw information with intelligence: Data presented in a raw form, without context or meaning, is often worse than useless as it can overload the decision-maker and create increased uncertainty. To be considered as intelligence, data must be refined to provide an accurate and meaningful feed to a risk process or business decision point. This requires a detailed process of analysis and synthesis, with the end result being to reduce the number of variables a decision-maker has to contend with.

Compromising the role of intelligence in driving operations: In the military, intelligence is a separate, equal staff function to operations: In corporate security, all too often intelligence is subordinate to an operational function and this can result in bias, poor decisions and a smothering of inconvenient facts (this has happened in the military too, a symptom we call ‘no tanks at Arnhem’). The truth may occasionally be unpleasant to hear, but it is surely better to make a decision with all the facts available and weighed into the balance.

Failing to keep the intelligence team in the picture: Changing business activities can result in the enterprise changing how it operates, potentially raising new risks. For example, people can be travelling to new locations without adequate due diligence and over-watch. To some extent the team will cover this through diligent internal networking, but a properly designed process will ensure that this liaison goes both ways.

Treating intelligence solely as a cost: Security in general is seen as a cost centre and intelligence cannot avoid this image. Yet, used properly, intelligence enhances operational efficiency and

Continuous review

Direction

Collection

Analysis

Dissemination

Evaluation and supplementary follow-on tasks

Identify business goals

Identify knowledge gaps

Determine intelligence

requirements

Intelligence estimate

Collection planning

Tasking sources and agencies

Resourcing

Communication channels and

vehicles

EvaluationComparison

Collation

Integration

Analysis

Interpretation

Relevance

Timeliness

Reporting vehicles

Appropriate Means

InfoSec

Figure 2: The intelligence cycle

...The worst result is to produce something that is not read, since this merely becomes hostage to fortune...



also effectiveness, since the capability can even be used to drive or improve business. One example is the use of business intelligence. Although this well-established function is intended as an extension to due diligence/compliance to help counter fraud or prevent harmful relationships, it can also be used to help identify key movers and enablers in new markets, supporting business activity.

Failing to manage knowledge effectively: As discussed above, much of the role of the intelligence team might lie in understanding one’s own enterprise. A big part of this is corporate knowledge management and here the intelligence process can help. Interestingly, one of the more prosaic ways where corporate security intelligence teams have helped save costs in several organisations is by identifying suppliers and eliminating multiple accounts across different jurisdictions. There is also a knowledge management aspect around the people in the post: since intelligence analysts only tend to get career progression by moving, it is essential that knowledge is not lost with them. This reinforces the need for robust, well-documented processes if ‘saw tooth’ performance is to be avoided.

Implementing lacklustre processes and approaches: To be meaningful, intelligence relies upon a robust process, and should itself be a part of a solid, tested and reliable risk management and decision-making framework. All too often security managers receive external ‘intelligence’ product (often of dubious quality or provenance), which they may or may not read or act upon. The problem arises when such intelligence does not reach the recipients who need it, when they need it. Imagine the situation where a report suggests a security incident is likely, but there is no process for absorbing or acting upon this intelligence (or perhaps making the connection between a piece of information and a particular risk). The incident comes to pass and subsequently the intelligence comes to light. Having information sources is not enough – and in the current information age, money is perhaps better spent on robust internal processes and analysts before external providers.

Relying too much on technology: Technology is often seen as a panacea, but in fact it must work in harmony with investment in people and processes. The current availability of technology and consequent explosion of information has probably decreased the ability of people to make sense of the environment, as discussed above. The main roles of technology for intelligence are in the collection and collation of information/data and in the dissemination of refined material. The tools required are fairly basic – until comparatively recently knowledge was managed using file cards, after all – and MS Office and open-source software is most of what anyone needs to be effective (unless they are carrying out complex investigations).

Failing to invest in people: Intelligence is an art and a science: There is hard analysis but ultimately much lies in the ability of the analyst to present his or her findings clearly and objectively, taking into account a hugely complex range of factors. This is actually a very hard thing to do, although it has taken a long time for this to be realised. The proof is in the pudding: our training courses are routinely

oversubscribed, and research has shown that investment in development is one of the main things that keeps analysts happy and in post. Moreover, consider carefully the background of your intelligence personnel. The government/academic/military solution might not be appropriate; instead, someone with the right mindset and experience of the industry might be more useful, since they have a greater understanding of what things really mean. If the mindset is correct, the rest can be taught – intelligence is partly an art, but not a black one, despite its reputation.

Treating intelligence as the oracle or stove-piping it: Intelligence is predictive and forward-looking if it is being done correctly, but it is impossible to predict the future with complete accuracy (otherwise all the good analysts would have retired by now, having made killings in the stock market).

Infinite variables, the human factor and the fact that adversaries have the initiative means that there is never absolute certainty – to misquote, we don’t know what we don’t know, and so certainly can’t assess how it might affect what we do. Additionally, intelligence doesn’t need to be secret to be effective. Stove-piping it as too valuable to share is a certain route to failure.

Preserve security where required, but, equally, the more people in the know, the better for the organisation, where possible.

Failing to learn from failure: Finally, and following from the above, things will go wrong and it is essential to learn from mistaken analysis or conclusions. Faith in the team should not be destroyed as part of this process (unless someone was genuinely remiss). Rather, it is an essential part of developing capability. Ideally this should be an integral part of analytical processes, and the process can be sped up through training and continuous assessment.

Justin Crump is a former British Army officer and specialist consultant to the FCO. He was previously an analyst in two investment banks, and director of a niche intelligence firm. In this role he advised number of aviation clients and he maintains a particular interest in the sector. He established Sibylline Ltd to promote understanding of security intelligence, focusing on consultancy, training (including the DICSE developing intelligence course), recruiting, and the implementation of analytical solutions in response to client requirements – particularly around social media. He blogs for the Huffington Post and regularly comments in international media. He can be reached on [email protected]

...Intelligence is, of necessity, the lifeblood of risk management, and we currently exist in a very serious and risky threat environment...


CRISIS | RESPONSE+

Subscribe nowSAVE LIVES, PROTECT PROPERTY, PRESERVE THE ENVIRONMENTCrisis Response Journal is the professional global platform for news, in-depth analysis, cutting-edge thought leadership and commentary. It covers: Resilience, security, continuity and sustainability arising from natural and man-made disasters. We offer a range of discounts and generous multiple copy rates. Visit www.crisis-response.com for more details

climate ++ disease ++ government ++ CBRN ++ fi re ++ fl ooding

++ medics ++ police ++ continuity ++ security ++ volcano ++

++ disruption ++ unrest ++ resilience ++ terrorism ++ business ++

terrorism ++ USAR ++ aviation ++ weather ++ quake ++ aviation ++

Tel: +44 (0)1344 753370 | www.crisis-response.com | mail@fi re.org.uk

British Red Cross SPF Henrik Thorburn NOAA

UNHCR USGS / NASA NZFS M Schwankhart

Dvilanski / Adom iStock Master Sgt Jeremy Lock Red Cross


When a lone suicide bomber walked into Moscow Domodedovo’s busy

international arrivals hall and blew himself up in late January, the attack was viewed with a certain grim inevitability by those of us intimately involved with aviation security.

The bombing, in which 35 people died and a further 185 were injured, briefly lifted the question of terminal security to the top of the news agenda, serving as a chilling reminder that all aviation community assets remain prime targets for those with intent.

Domodedovo is the biggest of Moscow’s three international airports, the hub of choice for nationals, business travellers and tourists, and handles more than 22 million passengers a year.

Nevertheless, its security regime was questioned in 2004 when two female Chechen suicide bombers were able to carry devices on to two passenger planes and detonate them in mid-air.

In the aftermath of that earlier incident, the airport bolstered security. The enhanced architecture remains a robust and well respected operational feature, considered to be on a par with that expected at other major international airports around the world.

However, this most recent attack has left a lingering question over the wider terminal security architecture, which has potentially serious implication for airports across the globe.

Aviation security has been significantly enhanced in the years since the suicide hijackings of September 11, 2001.

The regime is built on the premise that aircraft alone remain the prime target for terrorists and mostly disregards the threat to other aviation assets.

The centrally deployed technology and techniques at airports, combined with the measures protecting travellers while in-flight, supposedly limit the opportunity for those with intent to inflict harm. This approach may well achieve what it is meant to in the airside or airborne environment, but the rest of the infrastructure supporting the aviation industry remains a soft target that is wide open to attack.

Domodedovo illustrated succinctly that landside airport terminal facilities are just as potent a target for suicide bombers. An earlier vehicle-borne attack at Glasgow demonstrated that the landside fabric of such buildings can be seen as equally attractive targets. Although nothing much has been done to address the walk-in attack yet, steps have been taken to prevent further drive-in attacks.

Airports are mostly public facilities,

where non travelling members of the public are generally free to come and go around the clock. This level of access presents a significant security challenge to planners.

Extensive closed circuit television monitoring has long been seen as a deterrent to criminal activity but, in the age of the suicide bomber, offers little more than a means to analyse an incident after the fact.

In the immediate aftermath of the Domodedovo suicide bombing, some within the security sector suggested greater use of behavioural analysis and profiling techniques, as a means to identify potential terrorist threats. This approach is considered impractical by others, who argue that sufficiently trained analysts would be vastly outnumbered by visitors and travellers.

New technology may provide the answer to the conundrum.

A hardware trial due to get underway

Terminal insecurityThe suicide bombing at Domodedovo Airport’s arrivals hall in January is a chilling reminder that all aviation community assets remain prime targets, writes Chris Yates, who says that our current security methodology must change

...It is only a matter of time before a Domodedovo-style attack is transposed to Heathrow or any one of a number of other major airports...

security

Domodedovo Airport in Russia was the scene of a suicide bomb attack, illustrating how landside airport terminal facilities are a potent target for terrorists


the intervening years we have seen the aviation security system sidestepped time and again with actual and attempted terrorist efforts.

We’ve also seen the emergence of a new range of weaponry which currently deployed screening solutions cannot identify easily.

Following the demise of Osama bin Laden earlier the year, politicians the world over hailed this killing as the end of Al-Qaeda and proof positive that the terrorist threat was in terminal decline.

Nevertheless, counter-terrorism forces in the United Kingdom hauled six individuals before the Courts in recent days, charged with various terrorism-related offences.

These charges included planning a campaign of suicide bombings, gathering the materials to make improvised explosive devices and the recording of martyrdom films, among others. It is not yet known how advanced this alleged

plot was, or what the intended targets might have been, but a little educated guesswork might reveal answers.

Clearly the threat from terrorism is a long way from being over and demands we remain at a high state of preparedness.

The security measures in place at airports have been deployed reactively.

After each incident to beset the industry an additional solution has been tacked on to the hardware already deployed. This approach is well past its sell-by date and almost everyone in the industry agrees that the current methodology must change.

The UK Government announced its intention to shift policy on aviation security during the summer recess. Having previously adopted a regime of prescribed aviation security measures, it has signalled its intention to move to an outcome-focused risk-based model.

Proponents of the suggested regime argue that it will ease the burden on passengers and reduce cost. Critics argue that the policy shift will put this critical function in the hands of commercial entities more attuned to profitability than national security.

Government hopes that the commercial sector will rise to the challenge and invest in new and innovative aviation security solutions. In doing so, airports in particular should take a holistic view which includes landside security.

It is only a matter of time before a Domodedovo-style attack is transposed to Heathrow or any one of a number of other major airports.

imminently at East Midlands Airport, will see a laser-based device deployed to screen passengers as they enter the terminal.

The non -contact device, developed in the labs at Loughborough University, automatically scans passengers head to toe for trace amounts of explosive residue.

This new and extremely accurate screening solution offers airports the ability to extend security screening to the perimeter of airports, with no impact on freedom of movement of visitors or passengers. The device is garnering much interest from airports overseas.

During the past decade we have witnessed a step change in both terrorist methodology and capability. The terrorist strikes against Washington DC and New York a decade ago propelled us into an entirely new era in which those with intent had no qualms about giving their lives in pursuit of their cause. In

Chris Yates is the Principal of Yates Consulting, a specialist agency that delivers advisory and other support services in relation to aviation security. He formerly acted as the Aviation Security Editor for IHS Jane’s and IHS Jane’s Airport Review, for which he is the author of several books and special reports in relation to aviation security, and a countless number of articles in the field. Chris Yates continues to provide active support in the litigation phase of the September 11 terror attacks on New York and Washington, DC, as well as providing consultancy and expert witness support to the legal and insurance professions in other matters related to aviation terrorism, security and safety.

security

Andrey A

rkusha / Dream

stime


The key defence of course is good security at the airside boundary throughout the airport – particularly the achievement of good access control for staff authorised to work airside among the planes – and this presents a serious challenge for cargo handlers. The achievement and maintenance of top class security measures to prevent unauthorised personnel from entering the critical airside areas is becoming increasingly important throughout the airports of the world.

The application of modern facial biometric systems has helped greatly where it has been introduced by far-sighted operators, but most face recognition technology can only be used effectively in overt control of access to secure areas, alerting potential attackers and only operating fully effectively if entrants co-operate willingly with the system. Now, experts at British biometric company OmniPerception Limited, have developed ‘next generation’ facial surveillance technology that can monitor movement and check identity covertly – seeing without being seen.

The technology has been incorporated in a product called Checkpoint.S, which can analyse a person’s face and compare it against an existing identity database while the person is moving past a camera at some distance from it. Traditional face

The current review of air freight security by UK and US governments presents an ideal opportunity to realise

the benefits of next generation facial surveillance technology in protecting the safety and security of airports, especially cargo areas.

Unwelcome developments in the threat environment, such as explosives disguised as toner cartridges on cargo planes, along with increasing pressure on security and immigration teams from these and other sources, have brought into sharp focus the need to review the security of cargo areas radically.

While the safety and security of passenger planes have, arguably, never been as comprehensive and stringent as it is today, cargo planes are often more vulnerable to attack for a number of reasons. Security protocols vary around the world and not all cargo is X-rayed or scrutinised as closely as passenger baggage. Even where X-ray machines are in use, critics say that they are often not effective tools to deal with bulk cargo.

The toner cartridge ‘bomb’ incident last November was just one of a number of worrying developments that have highlighted the danger of a potential terrorist attack on a cargo plane; an attack that could have disastrous consequences for large numbers of people.

Protecting our airports: facial recognitionThe practical limitations of fingerprinting and iris technology mean that ‘third generation’ face recognition technology is now the leading solution for mass transit and mass identification purposes, argues Dr Stewart Hefferman

security

Juan Camilo Bernal / Dreamstime


recognition technology needs a close-up shot of a person looking directly at the camera in order to have any chance of identifying them.

Checkpoint.S was the culmination of many years of research into the core technology and the direct result of 18 months of highly focussed research and development by experts in the company’s headquarters in Guildford, UK, during 2009 and 2010. The final stages of the process were made possible through funding support from BAE Systems – which is committed to championing new technology and innovation.

The fact that Checkpoint.S is a covert system that can follow a person’s face and pin down their identity in seconds, is set to revolutionise the safety and security of vulnerable cargo areas. The spotting

of unauthorised persons is instant and extremely accurate.

If a person is a known criminal or terrorist and has their image recorded on the database, then they will immediately be identified and the authorities alerted. Even if the person is not already known to the authorities, the fact that they are unauthorised entrants to a vulnerable area means that the alarm can be raised quickly and appropriate action taken.

Though CheckPoint.S is an effective security tool on a stand-alone basis it is, of course, even more effective when cargo operators and airport authorities work together with local law enforcers to compile and maintain a joint database of known individuals; and this database

...I predict that facial recognition technology will continue to play an increasingly important part in that endeavour in the coming years...

security


ib PROFILEsecurity can be constantly updated as more information comes to hand.

To optimise the effectiveness of this new technology, particularly in the context of international terrorism – the database of known ‘undesirables’ would have to be on an international level and receive the support of all countries. Although challenging, I don’t believe this would be too difficult to achieve.

The political will exists to improve security and biometric technology is now available which can make a real difference if used in the right way. I believe that it has immense potential to help protect vulnerable cargo areas, in airports and elsewhere.

The covert CheckPoint.S solution has been developed from OmniPerception’s now standard CheckPoint system, originally developed by the company for international bank HSBC to protect secure access to sensitive areas across the UK. CheckPoint is an overt system used for both access control and ‘clocking in’. In the airport security sector, for instance, it is currently being used by one operator in Heathrow to tighten up security.

One of the strengths of the Heathrow CheckPoint application is that it provides a turnstile type system which prevents anyone entering a secure area until their identity has been verified. It also prevents ‘tailgating’ or ‘slipstreaming’ in which an unauthorised person slips in behind someone entering legitimately. With CheckPoint embedded in a turnstile system, this ruse is not available to criminals, terrorists or anyone else.

All our customers are finding that the CheckPoint system has full staff buy-in, not only because it is quick and accurate but because it is also easy to use.

These issues must not be dismissed. I have worked in the biometric industry for ten years and I think it would be a mistake for the industry to become complacent about the importance of public acceptance – in this case staff acceptance of the technology – and also the need to pay careful attention to the debates about the ‘Big Brother’ society and the potential for infringement of civil rights.

Technology is, of course, only a part of a wider solution alongside other security measures, such as staff vigilance and

specialist training in how to identify and deal with suspicious people and packages.

Also, these days especially, cost is a key issue for baggage and cargo handlers as well as airport authorities which, like the rest of the world, are experiencing testing financial times. We try to work with our customers from the outset to provide them with technology that is tailored to their individual needs.

This way costs can be controlled and are open and transparent. These austere times have meant that the relationships between technology suppliers and their customers has shifted and has placed increasing responsibility on suppliers to provide solutions that are not only effective, but also high value-for-money.

In this context, having decided that a positive identification (biometric) solution is needed, another key issue for cargo suppliers is to weigh up the benefits of using face recognition over other biometrics, such as iris or fingerprint technology.

While fingerprinting is extremely accurate in many areas of its use, it should be remembered that there is a significant percentage of people who do not have a registrable fingerprint at all – either temporarily or permanently. Also,

fingerprinting in some applications or in specific geographical areas of the world, has significant operational as well as psychological disadvantages.

The taking of each person’s fingerprint means they are required to touch surfaces that other people have touched, which is a distasteful idea to many and does in fact involve some actual risk of disease transmission – especially in epidemic situations such as SARS. There are also very clear criminal implications associated with fingerprints that can often make their use unpalatable to the public.

Iris technology has proven its accuracy in laboratory trials and in some limited field applications, but in bulk trials with mass transit in mind it has been found wanting. For instance, over 30 per cent of the disabled people in one of the UK Home Office biometric trials proved unable to achieve any iris registration at all. This kind of practical limitation poses a real problem for passport and ID card applications alike.

Though automatic face recognition has had a good deal of negative press over the years, I would argue that modern ‘third generation’ face recognition technology is now the leading biometric solution for mass transit and mass ID purposes.

One of the key benefits to using facial recognition technology is that it is not as intrusive as the other two methods, nor is it as difficult to use. User acceptance is a throbbing beat that runs through this whole debate, particularly bearing in mind that many nations rely on good international relations; and the welcome visitors who come for trade and tourism; as well as protecting themselves against the unwanted ones.

With this in mind, face recognition is the preferred solution – effective and easy to install, to use and to maintain.

We are still awaiting a formal announcement of the reviews of cargo security by the UK and US governments, but it is clear that the onus will be on cargo handlers and airport authorities to ensure that security measures stay at least one step ahead of the threats. I predict that face recognition technology will continue to play an increasingly important part in that endeavour in the coming years.

...user acceptance is a throbbing beat that runs through the debate...

Dr Stewart Hefferman is CEO of biometrics experts OmniPerception


emergency planning

Before you flip over to the next article I would ask you to stop, pause and reflect. If you are ever likely to

perform a decision-making role within an organisation responding to a major incident, and you have not had any experience of this sort of event before, then I would recommend that you read these pages and make up your own mind about what you need to do next. The intention of this article is to improve the reader’s understanding of the imperatives associated with the need for an effective emergency response plan.

Aviation is remarkable for the extent to which it has matured relatively, in safety terms, over the last quarter century. We have progressed significantly, both technologically and procedurally, and this has reduced the number of fatalities per million miles flown. Aircraft are now more robust and reliable and less prone to failure. But aviation remains terribly unforgiving of human error or carelessness. There is clear evidence that, in an open market, an operator which experiences an accident also suffers commercially.

A fatal aircraft accident, no matter what the cause, produces a sense of failure in most of us. That feeling is made worse when the accident is either predictable or avoidable and, sadly, history proves that certain accidents are entirely predictable and/or avoidable. Some industries have a high degree of control, within a regulatory framework, over their operating environment (eg nuclear/chemical). While one might claim that aviation is highly regulated – and indeed this is true – it is not so fortunate in terms of control over its operating environment.

Aviation is vulnerable to others operating in the same environment, whether this be other aircraft, ground agencies, air traffic control or third parties. Aviation cannot, and must never, assume that others may share its own approach or level of commitment to safety and security.

Although a safe operation in an unsafe environment is a contradiction, operators and senior managers within the industry must address the risks under

definitely the case and applies, generally speaking, no matter how large or small the organisation.

It would be wrong to suggest that all operators lack sufficient preparedness – some take it very seriously and are good at it, some have prepared plans, but rarely practise or update them – many either do not have any plans at all, or have plans which are, frankly, totally inadequate and would not be of much value in a

which they operate and determine their acceptability. We are in the business of risk management.

It is probably no coincidence that ICAO, within its Safety Management Manual (SMM) mandates the production of an emergency plan by operators. The contention is made that, perhaps because major air accidents are such rare events, few organisations are truly prepared for them. In my experience, this is very

So, you think you know how to handle a major event? Ron Lindsay says this is not a

subject for the faint-hearted

Emergency planning and response to major incidents


real event. This is despite the fact that governments and their regulators, and particularly the media, expect operators to be adequately prepared. Perhaps not surprisingly, customers who use the operator’s services naturally assume that the operator has spent the necessary time and effort to prepare to deal with serious events in a competent way. So, is this lack of apparent readiness born of complacency, or is something else acting as a malign influence?

Even good organisations can have bad days.

Most operators genuinely believe that they run a well managed, safety-orientated, organisation – equipped with a first-class fleet of aircraft, flown by an experienced, well-trained pilot force and conditioned by effective safety and quality management systems. Given the probable existence of such a belief, and the fact that participation in the development of a competent response plan will compete for busy executive’s attention, it becomes easier to understand why the need for a comprehensive emergency response plan is considered less of a priority.

However, this tends to ignore the fact that they are not in control of their operational environment, as indicated above, nor is there a clear understanding that the response to a major event is not at all like managing a difficult operational day. Responding to an aircraft accident, or other major event (especially one potentially involving fatalities), demands the application of procedures, processes and skills which are not a feature of normal day-to-day management. There is an argument here that failing to prepare is, truly, preparing for failure.

In truth, there is no immunity from crisis for any commercial organisation. Accidents will continue to happen, no matter how well managed an organisation might be. The event could be the outcome of the act of a third party (terrorism, mid-air collision, etc), simple human error (runway incursion, etc), a technical failure or other ‘external’ event not foreseeable by the operator. No matter what the cause, when it happens, events will no longer be within the direct control of the affected organisation. At no other

time will you and the organisation come under such intense scrutiny – by regulators, by your customer base and by the general public (through the often distorted perspective of both broadcast and print media). The organisation’s response may condition its very survival.

So what is it that we are trying to protect?

Reputation is what you sell…. and a good reputation cannot be bought, it must be earned. Have no doubt: your business reputation is at stake in the event of a major incident. No individual or organisation can improvise on the day. A competent response requires a structured plan. An effective emergency response, executed through a competent crisis management process, will act to mitigate reputational damage, helping to minimise the impact on the company’s bottom line and to protect shareholder and stakeholder value in the business.

There are potentially serious risks for businesses that are inadequately prepared to deal with the unexpected. Studies have shown that up to 70 per cent of organisations experiencing disaster cease trading within 18 months, and a study undertaken by Price Waterhouse contended that 35 per cent of disasters cost businesses over £500,000 (US$786,000; €573,000).

Studies of reputation and brand management have determined that an organisation’s behaviour and non-financial performance are almost as important a determinant of reputation as its formal financial performance. In the context of an aircraft accident, organisational behaviour is likely to dominate external perception.

Despite this, we find that in most organisations, reputational risk is not managed in a systematic manner and many believe that it is mainly a public relations management issue. Reputation is particularly at risk if problems occur in an area considered to be a ‘core competence’. And, in this context, flying aircraft safely is considered to be a core competence.

In most organisations, reputational risk management is unlikely to have been identified as the responsibility of one person and is rarely treated as a separate

or distinct business issue. Often, it is managed in a fragmented way, tending to be inclined towards reactive, post-event crisis management. Frequently, stakeholder expectations of the business are not considered, or understood, adequately. I wonder how many readers of this article can readily identify such characteristics from organisations with which they may have worked, or are currently working. Organisations such as this might be considered ‘crisis-prone’ and in need of an overhaul of its emergency and crisis management plans and processes.

I am not suggesting we undertake the ‘risk management of everything’.

emergency planning


The key will be to try to determine: What level of preparedness matches the risks the business could face; defining a process that is fit for purpose; being reasonable in terms of the amount of effort needed to develop a satisfactory process: and the amount of attention required to get it right.

Customers, shareholders and regulators expect airline and business aviation operators to identify more readily with the characteristics of a high reliability organisation than one that could be described as crisis-prone; after all, we operate within a highly regulated operating environment within which expectations of high-

reliability is normality. So, what kind of characteristics might be sought? I would argue that a high-reliability organisation might have the following characteristics:

• Maintains reliability and performance at very high levels as a matter of routine;

• Sustains effective operational performance, despite pressures to achieve higher performance at lower cost;

• A strong sense of ‘Missions and operational goals’ permeate the organisation;

• There is a sense of commitment to operational reliability across the organisation;

• There is investment in reliability-enhancing technology, processes and people;

• Everyone understands the emphasis on sound knowledge of the fundamentals;

• This is complemented by high levels of technical and professional competence;

• Everyone understands the potential cost of failure;

• An environment exists which supports constant learning, training and practice; and

• There is a common goal – ‘collective performance takes precedence’.

A fatal aircraft incident, such as the Helios Airways Boeing 737-300 with 115 passenger on board in 2005, produces a

sense of failure for all those involved. That sense of failure is compounded if the

cause was preventable

emergency planning


Within such an organisation, one might expect to see a well-constructed set of business contingencies and effective emergency procedures, where individual roles are understood and practised on a sufficiently regular basis to maintain familiarity and competence. In this respect, organisational policies and a statement of commitment from the top would be contained within any emergency response manual. Emergency alert processes and notification plans would be in place, which would allow the organisation to identify quickly the severity of the incident and who needs to know what as a matter of urgency. Callout procedures in place would, again, be tested and rehearsed.

So, where do we begin?I have suggested already within this

article that the starting point for any organisation is likely to be an assessment of potential vulnerability. Those tasked should examine safety, security and other business functions and priorities using processes (such as risk management) to provide methodology. It makes sense to conduct risk management assessments and, in this context, it is not difficult. Nor does it need to take much in the way of internal resources. All it needs is commitment from the top, some resource, time and effort, and some modest investment. Once compiled, the risk identified should be placed within an internal risk register and maintained from this point forward.

Having concluded the assessment exercise, the next stage should be to develop a complementary suite of contingency plans addressing many of the priorities indicated above. Plans should be developed to be as robust as possible, as inadequate plans lead inevitably to high workload and stress. Ideally, they should integrate both strategic and tactical responses. Developing plans which are realistic and effective can be hard work and some companies will never get beyond this point. Those developing such plans must feel that they have the unequivocal support of the management team commissioning the work.

What makes a successful plan?

Emergency response and crisis management plans must be established to facilitate the management of events that have the potential to damage a company’s reputation and mitigate the impact on normal business operations, including the fulfilment of legal obligations. A successful plan will be one that does not dwell too readily on detail. A good emergency plan will outline in writing what should be done after an accident, or major incident, and who is responsible for each action. Determining each individual’s prime responsibilities, so that they don’t have to recall it when everything around them is chaotic, is hugely beneficial.

Understand and specify clearly what the immediate priorities are likely to be. In this context, there is a need to ensure that the operator’s responsibilities are clearly understood. Priority should be given to the protection of all relevant records and vital evidence to facilitate any subsequent enquiry. Early consideration must be given for the care of those directly involved (not just those on board the aircraft) and how the organisation is going to deal with the volume of enquiries – from those involved and their relatives, but also from members of the public, potential or existing clients, emergency service agencies, airport authorities, foreign government agencies, regulators, and many others – and, of course, the media. Consider also the extent to which the organisation’s website can be used to convey key messages and information.

Providing individuals within the crisis management team with a series of bullet-point ‘triggers’ to action will often be sufficient to extract the right response. Key briefing material on the issues likely to be faced by those responding will be helpful. Plans must include the potential need for interaction with the main accident co-ordination centre.

Consider whether the organisation should position a team to the accident site to liaise with the local authorities and what expertise might be needed there. However, be aware that, unless you already have a relationship with key agencies responding (eg airport authority

and/or emergency services), then you will find that you are probably going to be a very small voice in a very much larger chorus.

So, what makes a plan successful?Preparation! Once plans are in place,

the effort should not be considered

emergency planning


complete. If the plans are to be effective, they should be tested within an exercise environment. Not only will this identify potential weaknesses in the plans, an exercise will also permit those with key functions to role-play and become more comfortable with the prospect

be abandoned for a significant amount of time.

Lessons from 9/11.Finally, much has been written about

the response to one of the greatest disasters of recent times and one which tested the effectiveness of many organisations’ contingency plans – the events of September 11, 2001. In the context of this article and the need for preparation of effective plans, there are a number of lessons which can be learned from this event.

For example, many organisations found that plans which were too detailed were less effective and many had failed to update plans in line with organisational changes. Not enough end-user testing of plans had been carried out and even simple things such as key contact details were found to be out-of-date. Many key employees had not taken copies of their plans home with them and found that they did not know what to do, or how to respond remotely from the office environment. In any emergency response process, trauma and stress can affect individual’s performance – expect it.

And finally, never allow yourself to think that you will be able to make it up on the day. The pressure of events will not permit you the time or the space to do so. This is the road to significant stress and serious errors of judgement – don’t do it!

The effort required to be adequately prepared is not overwhelming and there is the promise of peace of mind in knowing that, if the worst ever happens, then at least you have a basic plan from which to work and series of decisions waiting to be made, for which the questions may already be known (within the plan). The best time to learn is before the event – possibly even from other’s experiences and misfortunes.

This article has not touched on the need for other contingency plans (eg business continuity, or the preparation for a major security event, or even a pandemic outbreak). But, as they say, that’s another story.

of responding in a live situation. It is important to remember that plans of this nature are truly perishable. If they are simply kept on a shelf they will deteriorate over time. There is a need for regular review and overhaul by those with the responsibility for doing so and by operational management.

Having a reasonably comfortable environment within which to respond will greatly aid the decision-making effectiveness of key individuals. A carefully thought-through location, which can be treated as the focal point for the organisation’s response, will pay significant dividends – this may take the form of a converted boardroom, or a location dedicated to other activities which can readily be converted for the purpose. It might be equipped with suitable communications and media monitoring capability and other aids to effective crisis management.

Beware: every incident is unique and will bring its own set of challenges. No matter how comprehensive contingency plans might be, they will never ever completely predict the set of circumstances that the organisation will face.

The variables will distract and, occasionally, confuse. Local conditions at the accident site; the extent and competence of immediate assistance available; the quality of local facilities; whether there is a need to dispatch a company presence to the site; many issues will need to be addressed and resolved.

Of all the impediments to the ability of an organisation to respond effectively, the media can present the greatest threat. A potentially hostile media will be obsessed with detail; will search for answers and is not concerned with the inappropriateness of speculative suggestion – and it will only be a matter of time before journalists initiate the hunt for the ‘guilty party’ (in their view, there is always a guilty party). For those within the organisation dealing directly with the aftermath of the incident, media activity may seem frenzied and obsessive; occasionally intrusive and overwhelming. For many of those directly involved, normality will

emergency planning

Ron Lindsay MBE, MRAeS is Managing Partner with Gates Aviation LLP; www.gatesaviation.com

The emergency command centre for Changi Airport’s Fire Service: A carefully

thought-through location, which can be treated as the focal point for the organsiation’s response, will pay

significant dividends.


Strategically located in relation to South East Asia, Europe and Africa, Perth Airport is Australia’s fourth largest

airport in terms of passenger traffic. Under a 99-year lease arrangement with the Commonwealth Government, the airport is operated by Westralia Airports Corporation Pty Ltd (WAC).

WAC is a significant service provider, managing the power, gas, sewer, water, fuel, drainage and communication needs of three terminals and more than 200 tenants. It is also effectively the landlord, retail hub and conservation authority within the Perth Airport estate.The airport has experienced the highest passenger growth rates of any Australian capital city airport, reporting a 9.4 per cent increase in passenger numbers for the 2001/2011 financial year. More than 11.5 million passengers travelled through Perth Airport in 2001/11 and total passenger movements per year are forecasted to reach 18.9 million by 2029.

To meet this growth projection and to also prepare for the expansion of terminal facilities, WAC sought to gather more data across the airport estate, taking

multiple safety and security, operational, environmental, customer service, commercial and service infrastructure factors into account. WAC wanted to be able to integrate data from this range of complex interrelated areas of the airport estate and understand how the location of various factors was influencing their use and constraints.

To achieve this, WAC enlisted Esri

Australia, a leading location intelligence and Geographic Information System (GIS) specialist, to deliver a solution that provided enhanced spatial information management.

The solution was a sophisticated enterprise-wide GIS system that leverages a geographic web application server called Dekho.

Dekho works with WAC’s corporate

Perth Airport flies high with GISPerth Airport in Australia is improving its operations and sustainability, as well as minimising the likelihood of potential risks, by using a Geographical Information System combined with a geographic web application

mapping

Perth Airport has experienced the highest passenger growth rates of any Australian capital city airport

systems to combine their vast amounts of data into one user-friendly web-based interface. By providing staff with access to up-to-date and accurate information, this system enables employees at all levels to make informed decisions confidently and in a timely manner.

The true value of the system lies in its ability to present large volumes of data in the easy-to-interpret visual format of a map. By displaying data on a map, an accurate and comprehensive view of a situation can be depicted. Information that may at first appear random is sorted to show patterns and trends, within a geographic context.

By managing data in this way, compelling insights can be delivered that might otherwise have gone undetected.

Dekho enables WAC to disseminate and manage its data across multiple departments effectively, creating workforce efficiencies through time saving and near real-time information sharing.

“Before we implemented GIS, all spatial information requests were submitted to the Design Office (DO) to generate the relevant maps and data,”

says WAC’s Fiona Lander, General Manager Corporate Services.

“This meant that departments did not have real-time access to information and the DO could become bogged down fulfilling the myriad of simple requests rather than utilising its skills for design and spatial information management.”

Esri Australia’s corporate-wide GIS solution empowered staff across the entire organisation to access essential location related data to support operation of the airport.

“Through the implementation of Dekho, we now provide all staff with GIS access to self-serve maps,” explains Lander. “These can help with anything from planning the location of a new vending machine through to scoping the environmental impacts of building a new warehouse on the estate.

With so many stakeholders using location intelligence to get a greater insight into their working area, staff are better informed and therefore empowered to make better business decisions.”

Beyond the ability to create maps and visualise where assets are, location intelligence is playing a major role

in planning and development of the expanding airport precinct. In fact, it is: “Vital in planning the airport infrastructure for the construction or relocation of services and the maintenance of airport assets,” according to Lander.

“Through effective use of location intelligence, we will be able to move to a more proactive maintenance schedule and more efficiently allocate and plan resources, resulting in significant cost savings and a better running suite of assets,” she adds

WAC has many more plans for using location intelligence at Perth Airport to optimise workflows and understand the dynamic nature of the site better. Examples include further integration with the asset management and maintenance processes, detailed land use reporting, enhanced utilisation of location intelligence for operational activities and mobile access to GIS.

Says Lander: “We are really happy with the benefits that we have already realised using location intelligence and we have only just begun to touch the tip of the iceberg of potential applications.”

mapping

Screenshots of the system designed to provide enhanced spatial information management at Perth Airport



PROFILE

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) is Australia’s national transport safety investigator; its investigation

findings are used to improve transport safety.

Independent, fair and objective, it works closely with the aviation, marine and rail industries to improve safety by conducting thorough and systemic investigations of transport accidents and other safety occurrences. It identifies safety issues through investigations, research and analysis and promotes safety awareness and gets practical results.

The findings of its investigations prompt industry-wide safety improvements. Generally, Australia’s transport industry actively responds to safety issues identified through ATSB investigations by improving procedures, documentation and education. By directly dealing with safety concerns, the Australian transport industry is helping ensure that accidents and incidents are not repeated.

The ATSB is governed by a Commission and is entirely separate from Australian transport regulators, policymakers and service providers. And this independence is essential to its safety role – being able to investigate without external direction assures that investigation findings will be determined and reported without bias.

It conducts its investigations in accordance with the Commonwealth Transport Safety Investigation Act 2003 (TSI Act). Under the Act, information and findings from our investigations

can only be used for the purposes of transport safety. The aim of all ATSB investigations is to prevent the occurrence of other accidents and incidents. Blame or liability are not assigned, and its findings cannot be used for the purposes of taking administrative, regulatory or criminal action.

ATSB investigation reports and most evidence collected during an investigation cannot be used in civil or criminal proceedings. Reports may be used in coronial inquiries, but only for the purpose of improving safety.

The ATSB receives around 15,000 notifications of aviation occurrences each year, 8,000 of which are accidents, serious incidents and less complex incidents. The primary focus is on fare-paying passenger safety but we investigate most fatal aviation accidents, except those involving sport aviation.

Accidents and the most serious incidents have priority for investigation. Like many of its overseas counterparts, the ATSB investigates, concentrating its resources on those investigations considered most likely to enhance aviation safety. When the ATSB investigates an accident or incident, investigators will seek to determine its circumstances, identify any safety issues and encourage appropriate safety action.

Sensitive evidence collected in the course of an investigation is classified as ‘restricted information’ under the provisions of the TSI Act. In addition to the provision of significant coercive powers to collect evidence and interview people, the TSI Act contains

A look at the work of the ATSBCarl Fellows provides this profile of Australia’s national transport safety investigation agency, looking at how the ATSB improves aviation safety, both at home and abroad

confidentiality provisions, which prevent this restricted information from being made freely available for purposes other than transport safety. Importantly, this includes self-incrimination immunity for persons who are required to attend before the ATSB under powers of the TSI Act. Information provided under these circumstances cannot be used against the person in criminal or civil proceedings.

Depending on the severity and type of accident or incident, the ATSB will conduct an on-site or office- based investigation.

Factual investigations for less complex incidents and accidents use information from those involved in the occurrence and details of the circumstances surrounding the event to produce a short summary report. Its findings are released quarterly as part of the ATSB’s Aviation Short Investigation Bulletin. The bulletin details the facts behind each event as well as any safety actions undertaken or identified. It also highlights important safety messages for the broader aviation community, drawing on the ATSB’s investigations and research.

Some office-based investigations and most on-site investigations are detailed. ATSB investigators are responsible for the wreckage and the site’s safety when control of the site is handed over to the ATSB after emergency services have declared it safe.

The investigators photograph and record all the evidence at the accident site. They may arrange for the aircraft wreckage, components and other material evidence to be transported to the ATSB’s technical facilities in Canberra or to other appropriate facilities for further examination and testing.

To reconstruct the sequence of events, investigators will interview flight crew, passengers and any witnesses to the accident. They may also visit the departure and destination airfields and interview the pilot’s acquaintances and officials, including air traffic controllers, who may have been in contact with the pilot either during or before the flight.

Investigators will examine the aircraft’s logbooks and maintenance records and will look at the pilot’s

IAFPA BULLETIN Autumn 41

PROFILE

training and experience. If the accident occurred during the take-off, approach or landing phase of flight they will also gather relevant information relating to the airfield and its facilities.

Investigators will generally need to interview the pilot’s next-of-kin to understand the pilot’s background, and to examine professional documents or certificates kept at home. This is often an emotional time and investigators are always conscious of a family’s loss and privacy. They work with families to keep them informed of progress and explain the investigation and its findings before the final investigation report is released.

The ATSB releases a public report for each of its investigations, which can take many months to complete. Interviews, cross-checking evidence, examining

suspect equipment and consulting other technical experts all take time. The organisation and its staff take pride in conducting thorough, accurate investigations to find out what happened and, importantly, what needs to happen to prevent it from happening again.

Investigators aim to complete final reports within 12 months of an accident. If they identify any safety issues of immediate concern during the course of our investigation, the ATSB alerts the relevant parts of the industry and seeks to have those safety concerns addressed, including, if necessary, the issue of formal safety recommendations

Draft copies of the investigation report are provided for comment to directly involved parties or their representatives, including individuals or organisations whose

reputations may be adversely affected by the report. They will normally

have several weeks to comment before the report is finalised and will also receive advance copies of the final report.

On its public release, the final investigation report is published on the ATSB website at www.atsb.gov.au.

Any action taken in response to the safety issues identified during an ATSB investigation is described as a ‘safety action’, the aim of which is to prevent similar accidents and incidents from occurring.

The ATSB facilitates safety action by communicating safety issues to manufacturers, owners and operators throughout the course of an investigation. Proactive safety action is encouraged and is acknowledged in investigation reports.

Formal safety recommendations

are normally issued when attempts to facilitate a safety action have been unsuccessful and the risk level is considered to be either critical or significant. The ATSB has no legislative power to enforce safety recommendations.

A person, association or agency to whom a recommendation is made is required, under the TSI Act, to provide a written response to the ATSB within 90 days of issue of the recommendation that sets out whether the recommendation is accepted in whole or in part and if not, the reasons why that is the case. If the recommendation is accepted, they are also required to advise the ATSB what action has been taken or is proposed to be taken to give effect to the recommendation. All safety recommendations and their associated responses are made public through the ATSB’s website.

Australia’s reputation for high quality and rigorous investigations makes it well-placed to assist aviation safety in the Asia Pacific and it is committed to assisting regional neighbours through international agreements and participation in government programmes.

Where needed, it provides on-site investigation support for complex investigations and specialist services and training in the technical analysis and human factors areas.

ATSB investigators also work with international counterpart agencies and organisations to ensure that safety lessons and operational innovations are shared internationally. Through collaboration, we can all contribute to improving the international standards for accident investigation.

Australia’s engagement with its overseas counterparts is typical of the way the international aviation community co-operates for the common good. Lessons that will benefit safety are shared openly, and the knowledge gained assists other countries with improved passenger safety and better trained safety investigators.

Subscribe to updates at www.atsb.gov.au and follow us @ATSBinfo on Twitter for the latest news.

The uncontained engine failure of a Qantas Airbus A380 is one of the ATSB’s higher profile investigations

Date post:	12-Mar-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	firenet-international-ltd
View:	214 times
Download:	1 times

IAFPA Bulletin Autumn 2011

Documents