Skip to content

Archive

Tag: Annex 6

Your SMS does not meet the Standard specified in ICAO Annex 6, Part II.  Well, not by its self anyway. Ok, admittedly overstated, sorry.

My reason for the attention-getting statement is that many operators are under the misconception that the only requirement they need to meet is to implement an SMS.  There are more requirements, but they are being overshadowed by the SMS discussions.

continue reading…

On December 2, 2010, Bermuda announced that foreign aircraft operators subject to the Annex 6 Part 2 requirements, who have not yet achieved compliance, would be granted an extension to April 1, 2011.

In the interim period, aircraft visiting L.F. Wade International Airport (TXKF) may be subjected to random Ramp Inspections whereby evidence of progress towards compliance will be assessed and recorded by the Bermuda Department of Civil Aviation.

More information available at: http://www.dca.gov.bm/Lists/Announcements/Attachments/86/Clarification%20letter.pdf

Bermuda Department of Civil Aviation announced today that on November 18, 2010, all visiting FAR Part 91 and 125 operators will be required to be compliant with ICAO Annex 6 Part 2 Section 3.

Compliance with the SMS requirements will be monitored by random ramp inspections at the L.F. Wade International Airport (TXKF). Operators discovered to be not compliant will be refused entry to Bermuda until they can demonstrate compliance.

In relation to the SMS requirement, the Bermuda Department of Civil Aviation will accept the following as evidence of compliance:

  • IS-BAO registration;
  • Air Charter Safety Foundation (ACSF) registration;
  • ARG/US rating;
  • An SMS manual deemed acceptable by the State of Registry; or
  • Proof of intent to produce an SMS (e.g. a contract with a vendor (such as Air Safety Group) who is enabling IS-BAO registration).

More information available at:

http://www.dca.gov.bm/Lists/Announcements/Attachments/77/Annex%206%20Pt%202%20compliance%20(3).pdf

I ‘ve been a bit busy for the last few months, forgive me for not attending to ProAirman. 

During my absence, I have been privy to, shall we say, spirited discussions, regarding the need and/or value of the Safety Management System (SMS).  There is significant resistance, by some U.S. operators, regarding the implementation of the SMS.
continue reading…

In a recent post on the NBAA AirMail forum an operator questioned the discovery, during an IS-BAO audit, of the requirement for a flight data recorder (FDR) to be installed on their aircraft. The individual did not provide information, regarding aircraft type or age, so it is not possible to address the FDR requirements specifically for this operator.

continue reading…

IS-BAO – It’s more than an SMS

This article is the sixth in a series to simplify the understanding of the SMS processes. The entire series can be found here.

History of ICAO Annex 6, Part II

Annex 6, Part II, International General Aviation – Aeroplanes, was first introduced in 1968. Since that time, a number of amendments have been made, but the basic structure of this Part remained geared towards a general aviation environment typically operated for recreational purposes, domestically as well as internationally.

continue reading…

An Industry Sponsored Alternative for SMS Compliance

This article is the fifth in a series to simplify the understanding of the SMS processes. The entire series can be found here.

The previous article addressed the current dilemma for operators of States without guidance for safety management system (SMS) implementation.  For those who operate across International boundaries red flags ought to be flying high.

continue reading…

SMS Across International Boundaries

This article is the fourth in a series to simplify the understanding of the SMS processes. The entire series can be found here.

Putting together what we have learned in the first three articles in this series we know that:

  • ICAO requires that signatory States implement the requirement for an SMS for certain operators;
  • States that are signatory to the United Nations agree to:
    1. Operate in compliance with the regulatory requirements of the State in which the operation takes place, or in compliance with the regulatory requirements of the State of aircraft registration, whichever is most restrictive;
    2. Comply with the ICAO SARPS; and
    3. File differences for the SARPS in which the State will not be in compliance.
  • Commercial operators are already required to have an SMS; and
  • By November 2010 private operators will be required to have an SMS.

continue reading…

What is the Law – Really

This article is the third in a series to simplify the understanding of the SMS processes. The entire series can be found here.

According to the Convention on International Civil Aviation (also known as Chicago Convention), States that are signatory to the United Nations agree to comply with the Standards and Recommendations (SARPS) of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).

continue reading…

Why You Need a Safety Management System

This article is the second in a series to simplify the understanding of the SMS processes. The entire series can be found here.

Why do you need a Safety Management System (SMS)? In the spirit of simplicity, if you operate a turbine-powered airplane, it’s the law.

This statement is not completely accurate, but it is very close.

continue reading…