Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 22
22 TABLE 18 STANDARDIZED TRAINING COMMENTS Type Response Comment General Aviation No No comment provided General Aviation Other No comment provided General Aviation Other No comment provided General Aviation Other Like to develop more airport-specific training, but industry standard training provides for great supplemental material, such as the American Association of Airport Executives/ANTN series. Large Hub Other This would be a significant improvement, especially if this training was automated and easily accessible. GSP No There is too much variation for an overall generic training program. GSP Other I am not sure if that is possible as not every one of our customers is consistent with processes and procedures, so training is different by client and location. Airline Yes Simply because of the close proximity of our work to some of the other airlines operating at our location Airline Other It depends upon the program and the specific requirements. If every aircraft were the same and all of the equipment was the same and the airlines and the airport authorities could mutually agree on those procedures involved, the answer would be yes. Airline Other Corporate decision Comments for "Would you like to see a standardized safety training program used by airports, airlines, and ground service providers, similar to the NATA fuel service training program?" EXAMPLES OF STANDARDIZED of aircraft into and out of hangars (retrieved from FSF.org SAFETY TRAINING 2011). GAP contains a number of electronic and online train- ing modules and is built on considerable work conducted by A number of organizations provide literature and training mod- the ACI, AAGSC, European Regions Airline Association, ules to promote safe ramp operations. They include IATA, IATA, ICAO, NATA, National Business Aviation Associa- FSF, ACI, National Air Transportation Association (NATA), tion, Regional Airline Association, and other organizations. Air Charter Safety Foundation, and Australasian Aviation Ground Safety Council (AAGSC). As previously presented, a One part of the GAP program is a three-part video on tow- commonplace activity to gauge what type of training is war- ing corporate/business aircraft that provides best practices for ranted begins with program auditing. Many of the participants the safe use of aircraft-tow vehicles, safely towing aircraft, stated they currently audit their safety training program to iden- and general ramp safety. tify gaps in training procedures. Two examples of common safety training practices are the safety audit for ground opera- FSF Ramp Operational Safety Procedures is a standard tions (ISAGO) developed by IATA and the Ground Accident operating procedures (SOPs) template that includes industry Prevention (GAP) program developed by the FSF. best practices and guidelines for a wide range of ramp proce- dures. The document is intended to assist ramp supervisors in the development or improvement of their organizations' writ- ISAGO ten SOPs. The template is presented in Microsoft Word for- mat (doc) to facilitate customization by the user, including The implementation of ISAGO aims to improve safety and revision, deletion, and addition of information as necessary cut airline costs by drastically reducing ground accidents and to tailor the document to the organization's ramp activities. injuries. Refer to chapter six for additional information regard- The FSF Ramp Operational Safety Procedures template is a ing the ISAGO program. product of the GAP program that includes industry best prac- tices and guidelines for a wide range of ramp procedures and Flight Safety Foundation is intended to assist individual users in the development of unique written SOPs. According to the FSF, the guidelines The FSF launched the GAP program in 2003 to address the presented in the document are not intended to supersede gov- increasing number and cost of ramp incidents and accidents on ernment regulations or to replace manufacturers' or operators' airport ramps and adjacent taxiways, and during the movement policies, practices, or requirements.