Information Article - Aviation Emergency Response Plan ... · Information Article ... It has been...

Information Article

Aviation Emergency Response Plan Solutions / HAT Size Calculation Method - 2017 1

Information Article

Relevance:

An airline should be capable of rapidly and competently deploying a fit for purpose Humanitarian (HAT) Assistance Team at time of major crisis - particularly as related to a catastrophic aircraft

accident type situation

The HAT should be capable of geographical deployment to anywhere the airline flies to / over

The HAT can be airline provided; be provided by an external (third party), commercial partner - or be a mix of the two

This information article presents one method of calculating the ideal size for an airline HAT - based

on a mix of demographics, statistics, expert opinion, educated guesswork, precedent etc.

It has been assumed that the airline concerned has the basic manpower & budget resources to implement same AND / OR the budget to ‘buy-in’ such a service from a specialist, commercial

supplier

Information Article


Note - for detailed information regarding HAT operations, please see (separate document) CRPM Part 1 / Volume 3 - ‘Humanitarian Assistance Operations’. This latter manual can be found by clicking on the link below

(scroll down the displayed webpage until you find it under the above title):

http://www.aviationemergencyresponseplan.com/guideline-template/

Introduction The optimum target size of an airline HAT depends on many variables, all of which should be accounted for as appropriate - typically (the list is not exhaustive):

Seating capacity of largest aircraft in airline’s fleet (potential number of victims) Maximum crew size for the above aircraft Size of airline (manpower availability for crisis related duties [in general]) Support (or not) from very senior management - particularly policy approval & budget Type of operation - scheduled; charter (incl. tour operator); budget; executive; cargo etc. Statistical PAX analysis of e.g. family groups carried versus single travellers Statistical analysis - * HAT show / no show rate during real deployments and exercises Time of year (peak staff holiday times & Winter sickness rates etc. = low HAT turnout) ** Morale, dedication and commitment of HAT members (impacts on HAT turnout) What duties the HAT are expected to perform HAT rotations i.e. replacing a complete, deployed HAT with a replacement team

* Note - ‘average statistics’ with regard to volunteer ‘show’ rates are probably best obtained for each airline

during exercises. As an example only, one major passenger airline came up with a statistical ‘show rate’ figure

of between 60 and 70% after monitoring such empirical data (during exercises) over a number of years

** Note - A volunteer based HAT system typically works well. A compulsory based system can be problematic

Two more factors to consider i.e. should a deployed HAT be planned to have enough team members to support 24H shift operations ……………………………..OR - can it be assumed that accident victims (and / or HAT supported family, relatives and friends (FR) of such victims [i.e. FR who had not been travelling on board the accident flight]) will need to rest / sleep at the ‘normal’ times - thus permitting HAT members (assigned to them) to similarly rest / sleep? One must also consider HAT support operations based on airline HQ / elsewhere (i.e. other than at or near to the accident location itself) - e.g. manning the HAT management / support desk(s) 24H in the airline’s Crisis Management Centre; meeting and greeting at airports, sea ports, rail stations etc.; deploying in support of FR (i.e. to their homes / wherever) who elect not to travel to / near to accident location etc. Typical HAT Duties

HAT Manager & deputy Manager(s) (Ideally, HAT Manager’s post should be a permanent

staff appointment within the airline)

HAT (Team) Leaders

http://www.aviationemergencyresponseplan.com/guideline-template/

Information Article


Face to face humanitarian related support for accident victims - including crew and any

ground victims

Face to face and / or remote humanitarian related support to FR of accident victims

(including FR of crew and ground victims)

*** ‘Peer Support’ duties where appropriate

**** Set-up, management, manning and operation of a Humanitarian (Family) Assistance

Centre(s) (HAC / FAC) - at an appropriate location(s) - ‘as directed’

Set-up, management, manning and operation of any other reception centre

24H manning of HAT support desk(s) in airline’s Crisis Management Centre (CMC)

Meet and Greet services - at airports, ports, rail and bus stations etc. - ‘as directed’

Any other ‘humanitarian assistance / welfare etc. related’ duties - ‘as directed’

*** “Peer Support” (where so trained and available) typically involves the provision of humanitarian assistance services (as and when required) to one’s own (airline) staff - particularly to the crew and any other airline staff who were on board the accident flight However, it can and is also used as a ‘de-stressing / defusing’ strategy amongst members of the HAT itself e.g. HAT member A providing de-stressing services to HAT member B (and possibly vice versa) when so required - or perceived to be required - or as directed by e.g. a HAT (team) leader **** Given adequate manpower (HAT) resources, there is absolutely no reason (in fact it is advantageous / desirable) why the Humanitarian Assistance Centre cannot be set-up, managed, manned and operated by the airline’s own HAT and other staff It is perfectly reasonable and possible for such staff to work with those being supported in the HAC - concurrent with conducting the actual operation of the facility itself (i.e. the two responsibilities are not mutually exclusive). Where the HAC is located in a hotel(s) (which is the norm) - managing the facility will be enhanced due use of hotel facilities, staff etc.

Where lack of airline manpower resources for the HAT is a significant consideration, a third party (external), commercial provider (of HAT services) can be engaged to make up the shortfall - including some degree or other of HAC manning - but always under the strategic (and tactical [i.e. on-site] where possible) command and control of the airline No airline should ever permit itself to get into (or remain in) the situation where it does not have at least a core HAT - even if that comprises e.g. just 5 to 10 persons. In such a situation it is recognised that the need to engage a suitable third party (external), commercial provider (of HAT services) is paramount. However, it must also be recognised by all concerned (and put in the associated contract) that the airline shall always retain strategic command and control of all its HAT related operations

Assumptions A fictitious (scheduled) passenger airline has been used to provide some ‘context’ to this article - and has been broadly based on a medium to large sized European country registered, headquartered & main based operator. The airline is an international carrier (including USA destinations) and operates a range of aircraft types varying from 100 seaters up to 550 seaters - over short, medium and long-haul networks

Information Article


The airline can be assumed to be well resourced and supported from an emergency response planning context (manpower, budget, facilities, top management approval & support etc.) Whatever applies to this fictitious airline herein may be regarded as also being typically applicable, to a greater or lesser degree, to other (medium to large sized) scheduled passenger airlines worldwide (***** and, [to a lesser degree] many other passenger carrying airlines e.g. charter and lease operations). However, there will always be differences - and it is for users of this article to adequately account for them

***** For example, the assumption (based on actual statistics) has been made in this information article that

around 67% of passengers are single travellers - with the remaining 33% comprising family groups (or

equivalent) averaging 2.5 passengers per group

This assumption will be incorrect at one extreme - e.g. for the ‘all business class’ executive type airline

(admittedly there are not many of them around) - and at the other extreme for the predominately ‘family

holiday package’ type airline - where family groups will prevail

Ideal HAT Size - a Proposed Conclusion and Calculation Methodology Starts on next page:

Information Article


CONCLUSION / RECOMMENDATION Basic Calculation

a) Take the maximum aircraft (passenger) seating configuration possible - as related to the specific air carrier’s normal operations

b) Multiply a) above by the appropriate factor in order to estimate the ideal HAT size required by the specific air carrier

‘Factors’ - Assumption 1 Assumption 1 is based on a deployed (i.e. deployed to / as close as practicable to accident location) HAT working single shifts only (typically 12 to 14 hours per shift) during normal / near normal working hours for the location i.e. during a 24 hour period it is assumed here that the HAT will take between 10 to 12 hours rest (off-duty). The latter will correspond approximately to typical non- working hours and sleep periods for the location. Weekends, public holidays etc. are discounted The multiplying factor to use here is ‘2’

e.g. 100 seat aircraft would require a total HAT of around 200 persons (in round figures)

e.g. 550 seat aircraft would require a total HAT of around 1,100 persons (in round figures)

Note - the above factor allows not just for HAT members deployed to the accident location - but also for other HAT members required for related duties at airline HQ and also within the country where airline HQ is located. The factor also allows for an assumed ‘standard [average]’ number of crew (pilots and cabin crew’) - as related

to the aircraft seating configuration

‘Factors’ - Assumption 2 As per assumption 1 but now assuming 24 hour shift manning (2 x 12 hour shifts) by a deployed HAT The multiplying factor to use here is ‘3.33’ e.g. 300 seat aircraft would require a total HAT of around 1,000 persons (in round figures)

e.g. 550 seat aircraft would require a total HAT of around 1,840 persons (in round figures)

Note - the above factor allows not just for HAT members deployed to the accident location - but also for other HAT members required for related duties at airline HQ and also within the country where airline HQ is located. The factor also allows for an assumed ‘standard [average]’ number of crew (pilots and cabin crew’) - as related

to the aircraft seating configuration

Information Article


‘Factors’ - Assumption 3 As per assumption 2 but now assuming:

24 hour shift manning (2 x 12 hour shifts) by a deployed HAT…….……………….AND

The entire deployed HAT is expected to be rotated at an appropriate interval(s)

To see the calculation related to the above, please see Appendix D page 19 Rationale behind choice of above Factors See appendices A to E of this Information Article

Information Article


Deliberately Blank

Information Article


Appendices Rationale (Methodology) behind Choice of Factors

Information Article


Appendix A

SCENARIO 1 Assume 100 PAX (i.e. 100 = maximum seating configuration for largest aircraft in airline inventory) Assumption: 1 x single face to face HAT shift (duration around 12 to 14 hours) per 24H period Demographics / statistics / expert opinion / educated guesswork / precedent etc. - roughly suggest that 67 passengers (out of the 100) will be ‘singletons’ (i.e. travelling alone) and 33 will be comprised of family units (or similar) - made up on average of 2.5 persons (per each family unit) Therefore:

One on one face to face HAT support for singletons will require 67 individual HAT members

One on one face to face support for each family group (over and above the singletons) will

require a further 13 HAT members (13 x 2.5 = 33 passengers)

67 + 33 = 100 passengers (i.e. a full aircraft)

67 + 13 face to face HAT members = 80 HAT required in toto so far

A statistical (but nevertheless approximate) 35% HAT ‘no-show’ rate (i.e. on activation following alerting) subsequently gives a planning requirement of 123 HAT members (as 65% of 123 = 80) - purely for the face to face support role alone (i.e. not yet considering additional HAT requirements) 123 is a rather awkward number - and approximates nicely to a ‘short-cut’ (numbers of face to face

HAT required) calculating factor of around 1.25 (i.e. largest aircraft’s maximum seating configuration

[in scenario 1 we are assuming this to be 100 seats] x 1.25) - which would now give 125 HAT total

required for face to face support - which leads to 81 (65% of the 125) predicted to turn up for duty

(activated) following alerting i.e. 1 spare (over & above the 80 referred to [for passengers] further

above)

But we have not yet accounted for the aircraft’s crew (assuming here 2 pilots & 4 cabin crew for a 100 seat aircraft) i.e. we now need to consider 6 additional singletons (80 + 6 = 86) - thus we are still 5 HAT short so far as per the information provided (81) in the paragraph immediately above Conclusion - a HAT calculating factor of 1.25 will not QUITE be adequate if we are to achieve what is required above (i.e. face to face support for all passengers and crew) - and will NOT WORK AT ALL with regard to the additional (non-face to face) HAT requirements such as manning (airline HQ located) Crisis Management Centre (CMC) HAT management & support desks; providing airport and similar ‘meet and greet’ type services; deploying to FR homes (i.e. those ‘non-flying’ FR electing not to accept airline’s offer of travel to accident site) etc. Increasing the HAT calculating factor to 1.33 provides a revised availability ‘on duty’ (again assuming

35% no-show rate) of 86 HAT - which, as it happens, now additionally covers exactly the one on one requirement with the crew - but still leaves no one to man CMC HAT desks; provide ‘meet and greet’ services; deploy to FR homes etc.

Information Article


Going further, a HAT calculating factor of 1.5 would provide 97 ‘on-duty’ HAT i.e. 11 (97 minus 86)

for the extra (non-face to face) duties referred to in the two paras immediately above. This number (11) is extremely tight - but might serve as a planning indicator of an absolute minimum HAT calculating factor to use (i.e. discounting 1.25 and 1.33) for a 100 seat aircraft (8.5:1 approx) - especially in circumstances where manpower resources for the HAT might be problematic

1.75 would provide 114 ‘on-duty’ HAT i.e. 28 (114 minus 86) for the extra (non-face to face) duties. This would still be tight but might serve as a planning indicator of an advised minimum HAT calculating factor to use (i.e. discounting 1.25, 1.33 & 1.5) for a 100 seat aircraft (8.5:3 approx)

A HAT calculating factor of 2.0 would provide availability of 130 HAT i.e. leaving 44 (130 minus 86)

for the extra duties previously referred to. This figure (44) is *just about right and thus ‘2.0’ is the

recommended HAT calculating factor to use when deployed (double i.e. 2 x 12 hour shifts per 24

Hours) HAT shifts are NOT planned for - and where airline manpower constraints (re the proposed

size of the HAT) might be a significant consideration (8.5:4.5 approx)

*Rationale is as follows:

4 x HAT required for rotating 24H ops shifts (HAT management & support roles) at airline HQ Crisis

Management Centre Assume that 75% of FR (who were not on board the accident flight) choose to travel to accident

location (also assume that travel will be by air)

o 64 FR to travel (75% of 86). HAT to FR meet & greet ratio at departure airport(s) = 1:4 = 16

HAT required

o 22 FR remain ‘at home’- HAT to FR support ratio at homes = 1:1 = 22 HAT required

o Add a 10% contingency allowance (10% of [4 + 16 + 22] = 4

o 4 +16 + 22 + 4 = 46

o 46 equates more or less (it’s just 2 persons short) with the numbers available (estimated at

44) from the ‘2.0’ HAT calculating factor calculation as used in the box immediately above

Note 1 - The reader is reminded that 24H HAT shifts are not a consideration here i.e. we are assuming that the HAT will be required to take rest (not unreasonable as the people they will be supporting will also need rest) -

however, shifts will still be required for a small number of other (non-face to face) HAT members e.g. those manning the CMC HAT desk

Note 2 - Where an ‘absolute minimum manning factor’ (and possibly a ‘minimum manning factor also) cannot

be met for whatever reason - the airline will / might be forced to look at other options (‘do nothing’ should not be an option!). This typically involves the use of one or both of:

Increasing the victim (and / or victim family group - as applicable) to HAT ratio above 1:1 e.g. 2 victims

to 1 HAT, 3 victims to 1 HAT etc. Ratio increase above 3:1 is not advisable

Engaging the services of an appropriate third party (external), commercial organisation (which provides HAT type services) such as AVIEM, Blake, FEI or Kenyon

Information Article


Assumption: 2 x face to face HAT shifts (duration 12 hours per shift) required per 24H period

HAT calculating factor of 3.33 would give availability of 216 HAT - permitting double shifts (2 x 86 [=

172] HAT required) for direct support of victims - and leaving 44 (216 minus 172) for the other requirements. This is the recommended HAT calculating factor to use when 2 HAT shifts per 24H period are required - and where airline manpower constraints (re the proposed size of the HAT)

might be a significant consideration factor (8.5:2.2 approx)

SUMMARY for 100 Seater Aircraft

Single Shift - Use recommended ‘HAT calculating factor’ of 2.0 (8.5:4.5 approximately [Ratio of available HAT to Victims & their FR]) Double Shift - Use recommended factor of 3.33 (8.5:2.2 approximately [Ratio of available HAT to Victims & their FR])

Information Article


Deliberately Blank

Information Article


Appendix B

SCENARIO 2 Assume 300 PAX Aircraft - Max Seating Configuration = 300 - Single Shift Deployed HAT

HAT Calculating Factor is 2.0

2 x 300 = 600 ‘Show’ rate for HAT is 65% of 525 = 390 Singleton PAX (statistically but very approximately) = 67% of 300 = 201

Singleton Crew = 12 Family Groups (& similar) at 2.5 persons per group = 40 groups (99 persons in total)

201 + 12 + 40 = 253 390 minus 253 = 137

In plain language the above means that a HAT comprising around 600 persons is required in total. During HAT alerting and activation, it is estimated that 390 HAT will be available (turn up) for crisis related duties - 253 for face to face support to victims and 137 for other HAT related duties

This figure above (137) is *just about right and thus ‘2.0’ is the recommended HAT calculating factor

to use when deployed (double) HAT shifts are NOT planned for - and where airline manpower constraints might be a significant consideration (8.5:4.5 approximately)





o 190 FR to travel (75% of 253) - HAT to FR meet & greet ratio at departure airport(s) = 1:4 = 48 HAT required

o 63 FR remain ‘at home’- HAT to FR support ratio at homes = 1:1 = 63 HAT required o Add a 10% contingency allowance (10% of [4 + 48 + 63] = 11 o 4 + 48 + 63 + 11 = 126 o 126 equates more or less with the numbers available (estimated at 137) from the ‘2.0’ HAT

calculating factor calculation as used in the box immediately above - and is actually erring on the safe side by 11 HAT members (137 minus 126)

Note - if it is necessary to calculate ‘minimum’ and ‘absolute minimum’ figures - take guidance from the first two paragraphs at the top of page 10 See also Notes 1 and 2 at the bottom of page 10

Information Article


Aircraft - 300 seats - Double Shift Deployed HAT

HAT Calculating Factor is 3.33 3.33 x 300 = 999 ‘Show’ rate for HAT is 65% of 999 = 649 Singleton PAX (statistically but very approximately) = 67% of 300 = 201

Singleton Crew = 12 Family Groups (& similar) at 2.5 persons per group = 40 (99 persons in total)

201 + 12 + 40 = 253 253 x 2 = 506 (for 2 x 12 hour shifts) 649 minus 506 = 143

In plain language the above means that a HAT comprising around 999 persons is required in total. During HAT alerting & activation it is estimated that 649 HAT will be available (turn up) for crisis related duties - 506 for face to face with victims and 143 for other HAT related duties (8.5:2.4 approximately)

This figure above (143) is *just about right and thus ‘3.33’ is the recommended HAT calculating

factor to use where 2 HAT shifts per 24H period are required - and where airline manpower constraints might be a significant consideration (8.5:2.4 approximately)

* In fact, 143 is actually erring on the safe side by 17 HAT members (143 minus 126 - where the latter number

[126] comes from the ‘rationale’ calculation shown on the previous page)

SUMMARY for 300 Seater Aircraft

Single Shift - Use recommended HAT calculating factor of 2.0 (8.5 to 4.5 approximately [Ratio of available HAT to Victims & their FR]) Double Shift - Use recommended factor of 3.33 (8.5 to 2.4 approximately [Ratio of available HAT to Victims & their FR])

Information Article


Deliberately Blank

Information Article


Appendix C

SCENARIO 3 Assume 550 PAX Let’s now see how our previous HAT calculating factors work out for an aircraft with 550 seating (max configuration) plus 25 crew members: Aircraft - Max Configuration of 550 seats - Single Face to Face Shift is assumed for Deployed HAT (1)

HAT Calculating Factor is 2.0

2 x 550 = 1100

‘Show’ rate for HAT is 65% of 962 = 715

Singleton PAX (statistically but very approximately) = 67% of 550 = 368

Singleton Crew = 25

Family Groups (& similar) at 2.5 persons per group = 73 (182 persons in total)

368 + 25 + 73 = 466

715 minus 466 = 249

In plain language the above means that a HAT comprising around 1100 persons is required in total. During HAT activation it is estimated that 715 HAT will report (show up) for crisis related duties - 466 for face to face duties with victims and 249 for other HAT related duties

This figure above (249) is *just about right and thus ‘2.0’ is the recommended HAT calculating factor

to use when deployed (double) HAT shifts are NOT planned for - and where airline manpower constraints might be a significant consideration (8.5:4.5 approximately)





o 350 FR to travel (75% of 466) - HAT to FR meet & greet ratio at departure airport(s) = 1:4 = 87 HAT required

o 116 FR remain ‘at home’- HAT to FR support ratio at homes = 1:1 = 116 HAT required o Add a 10% contingency allowance (10% of [6 + 87 + 116] = 21 o 6 +87 + 116 + 21 = 230 o 230 equates more or less with the numbers available (estimated at 249) from the ‘2.0’ HAT

calculating factor calculation as used in the box immediately above - and is actually erring on the safe side by 19 HAT members (249 minus 230)

Note - if it is necessary to calculate ‘minimum’ and ‘absolute minimum’ figures - take guidance from the two paragraphs at the top of page 10. See also Notes 1 and 2 at the bottom of page 10

Information Article


Aircraft - 550 seats - Double Face to face Shifts for Deployed HAT

HAT Calculating Factor is 3.33 3.33 x 550 = 1831 ‘Show’ rate for HAT is 65% of 1831 = 1190 Singleton PAX (statistically but very approximately) = 67% of 550 = 368

Singleton Crew = 25 Family Groups (& similar) at 2.5 persons per group = 73 (182 persons in total)

368 + 25 + 73 = 466 466 x 2 = 932 (for 2 x 12 hour shifts) 1190 minus 932 = 258

In plain language the above means that a HAT comprising around 1831 persons is required in total. During HAT activation it is estimated that 1190 HAT will be available for crisis related duties - 932 face to face with victims and 258 for other HAT related duties

This figure above (258) is *just about right and thus ‘3.33’ is the recommended HAT calculating

factor to use where 2 HAT shifts per 24H period are required - and where airline manpower constraints might be a significant consideration (8.5:2.4 approximately)

* In fact, 258 is erring on the safe side by around 28 HAT members i.e. 258 minus 230 - where the latter

number [230] comes from the ‘rationale’ calculation shown on the previous page)

SUMMARY for 550 Seater Aircraft Single Shift - Use recommended HAT calculating factor of 2.0 (8.5:4.5 approximately [Ratio of available HAT to Victims & their FR]) Double Shift - Use recommended factor of 3.33 (8.5:2.4 approximately [Ratio of available HAT to Victims & their FR])

Information Article


Deliberately Blank

Information Article


Appendix D Further Notes Where an airline considers itself to be sufficiently well resourced and capable enough (almost predominately in terms of manpower and budget) to consider *periodically changing (rotating) a complete / entire deployed (face to face element) HAT - then the planning assumptions used in the calculations above (as they generally relate to ‘face to face’ HAT members only) will need to be adjusted accordingly (almost [but not quite] doubled in most circumstances) - and then factored into the overall outcomes

*As might be the desired case in longer term HAT deployments (e.g. more than 2 to 3 weeks)

For example and referring to a 300 seater aircraft and employment of double (2 x 12 hour) face to face shifts whilst deployed (see page 14), a total planned team of approximately 1777 HAT would need to be established from the start if rotation is pre-planned for (compared with 999 if no HAT rotation was involved). For those interested, the calculation is as follows:

Aircraft - 300 seats - Double Shift Deployed HAT + a Complete Rotation factored in for ‘Face to Face’ HAT only

Work out the figures exactly as done on page 14 to come up with a required HAT size (after the 35% no-show factor has been applied) of 649 Now simply add a further 506 (number of additional HAT required for direct face to face support if a complete rotation of this face to face team is required) i.e. 649 + 506 = 1155

Working backwards……………..1155 is 65% of ‘x’

Therefore x = 1155 x 100/65 i.e. ‘x’ = 1777 (compared with 999 for the non-rotation case) Using the same scenario and methodology as per immediately above - but this time based on single shifts, the figure would now be 989 (compared with 600 for the non-rotation case) - see page 13

Information Article


Deliberately Blank

Information Article


Appendix E

ABCX Airways - Block Schematic of a Typical Humanitarian Assistance Team Structure

Crisis Director or Leader GO Team

HAT Manager

HAT Leaders

HAT Members

Deploy (i.e. as part of a GO Team on most occasions) Uninjured Crew Reception Centres (Airport Airside and / or (usually off-airport) Landside) Uninjured Passenger Reception Centres (Airport Airside and / or (usually off-airport) Landside) Friends and Relatives Reception Centre (Landside - usually at or very near airport) Re-uniting Centres (one on-airport and the other off-airport (latter possibly part of HAC)) Humanitarian Assistance Centre (Land/Groundside - usually off-airport but may be close by) Hospital(s) Mortuary / Mortuaries Homes / residences of Victims and associated Families, Relatives and Friends Peer Support - i.e. in support of each other, other airline colleagues & external responders Anywhere else as required (e.g. JFSOC or equivalent [if set up]; airport ‘meet & greet’ etc.)

Alerting & Activation

Airline Contracted (Third Party) HA

Support (if available)

Date post:	22-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	phamthu
View:	217 times
Download:	5 times

Information Article - Aviation Emergency Response Plan ... · Information Article ... It has been...

Documents