By Vivienne Sandercock

1. Message from the Editor
2. A small matter of knowledge
3. Africa's 2015's Hazards, Incidents, Accidents and Safety Occurrences
4. Emergency Response Planning
5. Henley Global Safety and Quality Training
6. Missing flight MH370 search update: increased demand from airlines for inflight tracking systems
7. Safety Foundation studies data collection, urges data sharing
8. Botswana's aviation safety faces fresh scrutiny
9. News from the Johannesburg Airports
10. Safety and Security
11. SAAFA donations
12. Finale


While most "normal" peoples thoughts turn to the festive season and summer holidays those of us who are involved in Aviation Safety look at the normal increase in the numbers of serious incidents and accidents which occur at this time of the year. There have been a number of campaigns aimed at getting pilots to think more carefully before they jump into their aircraft either to take the family on holiday or just to take a trip. The inherent risks to general aviation in Africa are exacerbated at this time of year with excessive temperatures, severe thunderstorms and heavy downpours of rain and hail which, when added to, low hours pilots who only fly on high days and holidays and you have a recipe for disaster. So if you are going to fly during the next 6 weeks or so please keep an eye out for the inexperienced or unprofessional members of our fraternity and stay safe.

Wishing you all a very safe, secure and happy festive holiday season.



Aviation safety vs the "prosecutorial imperative". Indiscriminate prosecutions erode safety culture

This report contains extensive extracts from the Keynote Remarks of Jeff Shane, IATA General Counsel, to the Tort Trial & Insurance Practice Section of the American Bar Association Aviation and Space Law Committee National Program, in Washington, DC on 22-Oct-2015. Mr Shane addresses a key area of concern to those dedicated to applying lessons learned from airline accidents in the cause of improving air safety.

Major improvements in safety management have come with the advent of voluntary reporting systems, dating back to the 1970s. Mr Shane recounts that these systems have been encouraged by regulators in a number of countries as part of a non-punitive, "just culture" approach to safety regulation. There is an emerging consensus among regulators and airlines alike that a "just culture" approach yields greater benefits than a regime characterized by enforcement penalties. Essential to the success of such systems is that the information furnished through such systems be held in strict confidence.

However, Mr Shane was concerned at a persistent "prosecutorial imperative" - that judges, prosecutors, and trial lawyers often seek access to this material and, "in a growing number of cases, they have succeeded." If this trend were to continue, says Mr Shane, "the essential flow of safety information would simply dry up" as those with valuable knowledge fear the legal consequences of sharing information.

Safety Information Protection - and learning from accidents

A good way to start the discussion might be by reference to the Montreal Convention of 1999. My guess is that the people in this room know better than anyone what things were like before that treaty came into force. Under the old Warsaw/Hague regime, airlines had strict liability for mishaps, but the victims of an accident were entitled to no more than some absurdly low recovery amount, depending on the jurisdiction in which they were eligible to sue. Even in the United States, where airlines were compelled by regulators to increase the damages available through the treaty, the maximum recovery was $75,000 per passenger.

The only way claimants could break those limits was to prove in court that the carrier had been guilty of "wilful misconduct" - a gross negligence, reckless endangerment test that engendered many years of costly litigation that was excruciating for claimants and defendants alike. By the mid-'90s, the airline industry had had enough. In 1996, through inter-carrier agreements brokered by IATA and the Air Transport Association of America - today's A4A - the airlines waived the liability limits of Warsaw/Hague. The Montreal Convention of 1999 effectively ratified that waiver. Today, strict liability is still the centre piece of the regime, but unless the airline can prove that the accident was not due to its own negligence - in other words, prove that it took all available measures to prevent the accident -- claimants are entitled to recover all provable economic damages. The net result is that, as long as a claim falls under MC99, there is no longer any reason to spend years fighting in court over whether the airline was guilty of "wilful misconduct."

Even in the very rare case where the airline successfully asserts the non-negligence defence, claimants are entitled to 113,100 special drawing rights, or about US$160,000 at current conversion rates. The Montreal Convention made the recovery process more humane, to be sure. But it had an even more important benefit. I know that the plaintiffs' bar prides itself on using the evidentiary tools available in a trial to tease out important facts that might otherwise have gone undiscovered.

Thanks to the Montreal Convention of 1999, the litigation-driven incentive to construe the facts in ways most beneficial to one side or the other have largely gone away. But lawyers have a professional responsibility to construe those facts in ways most beneficial to our clients. Fact-finding thus can take a back seat to advocacy. Thanks to the Montreal Convention of 1999, the litigation-driven incentive to construe the facts in ways most beneficial to one side or the other have largely gone away.

After all, every accident, however regrettable, represents an opportunity to make flying safer, as long as we can find out what actually happened. We can say, thanks to these important developments in civil litigation over the past 20 years, that we now have a much better chance of exploiting that opportunity fully.

Since 1996, when the airlines first waived the limits of liability under Warsaw, the fatal accident rate in commercial aviation has steadily declined. In fact, 2014 was the safest year we have ever had. Jet-hull loss per million sectors flown in 2014 was 0.23, the lowest on record. Whether or not you believe that the elimination of "wilful misconduct" trials was a factor in that steady decline in accidents, at least we know that the reduction in such litigation had no adverse safety consequences.

The Prosecutorial Imperative vs. "Just Culture"

But there's another worrisome impediment to learning from occasional mistakes. It is what I will call the prosecutorial imperative. In too many jurisdictions, the instinct is to treat every accident as a possible crime. There is immediate tension between the technical accident investigators who simply want to find out what happened in the interest of making sure it doesn't happen again, and the criminal investigators who want to determine whether the accident was attributable to culpable conduct and if so to punish that conduct. I don't have to tell you what happens when the gendarmes put yellow tape around the scene of an accident and start quizzing witnesses.

Those closest to the event and with the most valuable information hire lawyers and are warned that anything they say may be used against them. Getting the facts becomes much harder. The prosecutorial imperative can compromise in a fundamental way the over-arching safety ethic. Even more worrying is that the prosecutorial imperative can compromise in a fundamental way the over-arching safety ethic that has been so successfully embedded in the DNA of the aviation industry. I'm talking about the "just culture" approach that is widely treated within the industry as a sine qua non to optimal safety performance. The idea dates back to the 1970s, when the first voluntary reporting systems were established.

It is a simple concept: Companies and their employees are encouraged to report voluntarily any defect, any anomaly, any departure from the norm, anything that might compromise the safety of flight. The information and its source are held in strict confidence. And no punishment follows - either of the employee or of the company. No protection is accorded to criminal activity, of course, but short of that, the information remains sacrosanct.

The great thing about the just culture approach is not merely that it produces timely information that can save lives, but that the information is widely shared among those who can benefit from it. There are searchable online databases containing massive amounts of vitally important safety-related information. With today's sophisticated analysis and artificial intelligence, it is possible to predict incipient dangerous conditions and remedy them well in advance of an actual system failure.

An Emerging Consensus: deficiencies are best addressed by a "just culture" approach

The value of just culture has been widely acknowledged by regulatory authorities. The FAA last June issued a new "compliance philosophy" (FAA Order 8000.373, June 26, 2015) that places new emphasis on non-punitive means of rectifying deviations from regulatory requirements when disclosed. Noting that some deviations arise from factors like flawed procedures, simple mistakes, lack of understanding, or diminished skills, the FAA believes that such deficiencies "can most effectively be corrected through root cause analysis and training, education or other appropriate improvements to procedures or training programs for regulated entities...." In other words, not through the imposition of penalties. The objective, quite clearly, is to encourage more voluntary reporting in the interest of ensuring that the safety management systems required of all airlines are working optimally.

"CASA embraces, and encourages the development throughout the aviation community of, a 'just culture,' in which people are not punished for actions, omissions, or decisions taken by them that are commensurate with their experience, qualifications and training."

Just last month Australia's Civil Aviation Safety Authority issued a new statement of regulatory philosophy that even more explicitly embraced the just culture approach. The agency wrote: "CASA embraces, and encourages the development throughout the aviation community of, a 'just culture,' in which people are not punished for actions, omissions, or decisions taken by them that are commensurate with their experience, qualifications and training."

Earlier this month, the European Commission convened a meeting in Brussels to introduce a "European Corporate Just Culture Declaration." The Declaration said: "It is acknowledged that, in an operational aviation industry environment, individuals, despite their training, expertise, experience, abilities and good will, may be faced with situations where the limits of human performance combined with unwanted and unpredictable systemic influences may lead to an undesirable outcome. "There's a bumper sticker that makes the same point in fewer words. It can be paraphrased as "Stuff happens."

The declaration then continues: "Analysis of reported occurrences by organisations should focus on system performance and contributing factors first and not on apportioning blame and/or focus on individual responsibilities...."
Very clearly, there is an emerging consensus -- among regulatory agencies and the industry -- that encouraging voluntary disclosure of safety information is in everyone's interest, and that the best way to do so is to apply non-punitive remedies to deficiencies that are voluntarily disclosed.

ICAO and Protection at the Global Level

We have seen too many cases in recent years in which judges, prosecutors, and plaintiffs' attorneys have sought access to this vitally important safety information. Despite this consensus, however, we have seen too many cases in recent years in which judges, prosecutors, and plaintiffs' attorneys have sought access to this vitally important safety information. In a growing number of instances, they have succeeded. If that trend were to continue, you can be assured that the essential flow of safety information would simply dry up. This danger is increasingly understood and it's now an issue that's being tackled globally, most importantly at ICAO.

Five years ago, an ICAO High-level Safety Conference recommended the development of new guidance - what ICAO calls "Standards and Recommended Practices" or "SARPs" - to be included in a new annex to the Chicago Convention devoted to safety management. The annexes to the Convention, are where the high-level principles enunciated in the treaty are turned into more specific and granular guidance. They aren't self- executing; they have to be implemented through national laws and regulations in order to be effective, but that's generally what happens. It happens because the quality of a government's aviation safety oversight is measured by the extent to which it has implemented ICAO's SARPs and other guidance.

The new SARPs envisioned five years ago were to spell out government responsibilities for the protection of safety information. The protection of information derived from accident investigations was already addressed to some extent in the accident investigation annex -- Annex 13. The new SARPs were intended to reinforce those protections and explicitly cover information reported via the safety management systems that are now a mandatory ingredient in airline operations - including, of course, the voluntary reporting I've been talking about. This new guidance will be included in the new Safety Management Annex -- Annex 19. And lest there be any doubt, the protection contemplated is protection from prosecutors, judges, and yes, even trial lawyers.

Some of the most important provisions can be found listed under new "Principles of protection" proposed for Annex 19. The first principle is that "States shall ensure that safety data or safety information is not used for: a) disciplinary, civil, administrative and criminal proceedings against employees operational personnel or organizations; b) disclosure to the public; or c) any purposes other than maintaining or improving safety; unless a principle of exception applies."

The "principles of exception" are what you would expect - cases in which the conduct in question clearly crosses the line from an honest mistake into the area of reckless endangerment, gross negligence, wilful misconduct, or whatever you want to call it -- conduct that would always be subject to prosecution under applicable national laws.

But the overarching idea, simply put, is that penalizing honest mistakes merely impedes the flow of valuable safety information and thereby actually increases the risk profile of the aviation sector. ICAO is moving towards a basis for a standard global approach by end-2016

The new provisions were circulated to governments for a final review last July in something ICAO calls a "state letter." Any further comments from the governments were due by October 15. The next step will be a review by ICAO's Air Navigation Commission with the intention of presenting the language to the ICAO Council - ICAO's governing body -- for final approval next March. Nobody expects to hear any dissent. The new provisions will then become effective in November of next year.

There is still an open question as to when the new provisions will become applicable to governments - 2018 or 2020 are the options being discussed. As I indicated earlier, nothing in an ICAO annex is self-executing; to be effective and enforceable, the guidance has to be translated into national law by governments. My guess is that a great many governments won't wait for the new language to become effective but will start their legislative processes working even sooner.

All of this is good news for the airlines, of course, but it is even better news for their customers - including you and me. Aviation is already the safest mode of transportation, and by a wide measure. But air traffic is predicted to double over the course of the next 20 years.

That means that we have an obligation to do all we can to make the remarkable safety management systems we rely upon today even better. The changes in law that I've discussed will be an essential element in that improvement.




8 Jan Bantam B22J 2 Hoedspruit, RSA
14 Feb Lancair 360 2 Close to R59 near Parys, RSA
12 Mar Raven 500 2 Near the army base, close to Potchefstroom Aerodrome, RSA
25 Mar RAF200 GTX 2 Outside of Uitenhage Aerodrome, EC, RSA
20 Apr Magni MI6-Gyro 1 18km NE of Citrusdal, WC, RSA
24 Apr Karakorum-8 (K-8) 0 Gweru, Zimbabwe
15 May RV7 0 The Coves, Hartebeesport, NW, RSA
24 May Aero Trike 1 Ditlou, Limpopo Province, RSA
26 May Microlight 1 RWY03 Springs Aerodrome, GP, RSA
28 May C206 0 Maun, Botswana
31 May PA28-236 1 Limuru, Kenya
07 Jun Windlass Aquila 1 Kroone Airfield, GP, RSA
18 Jun Spotter Aircraft 0 Witflag, Limpopo, RSA
05 Jul Maule M-7-235 0 East London Airport, EC, RSA
01 Aug Bush Baby 0 Benoni Airfield, GP, RSA
16 Aug Cessna 441 5 Tygerberg, Cape Town, RSA
27 Aug Beechcraft Baron 58 0 Wilson Airport, Kenya
29 Aug Dornier 228 All Ribadu Cantonment, Kaduna, Nigeria
20 Sep Cessna 150L 0 Nairobi National Park, Kenya
06 Oct Bae 146-300 0 Tamale, Ghana
10 Oct F7-N1 2 Hong, Adamawa State, Nigeria
12 Oct A300B4 0 Mogadishu, Somalia
14 Oct Bushbaby 0 Lanseria Airport, RSA
15 Oct Beechcraft Bonanza 1 Witbank area, RSA
28 Oct (Allegedly) Do328 TBA Afgoye Town 25nm West of Mogadishu, Somalia - there is still some speculation around this occurrence.
31 Oct AB321 224 Sinai, Egypt
02 Nov F27 0 Koussane, Mali
04 Nov AN12B TBA Juba, South Sudan
06 Nov Gyrocopter 1 Nr. Johannesburg Sports Club, GP, RSA
06 Nov X294 Motorglider 0 Port Elizabeth, RSA
07 Nov TBA 1 Port Elizabeth Airport, RSA
08 Nov TBA 1 Nr. Grand Central Airport, GP, RSA

Source, amongst others, PlaneCrash; News24, Aviation Herald, Flight Safety Information



28 Feb MI17 0 Khartoum Airport, Sudan
08 Mar Bell UH1H 1 Cape Point, Cape Town, RSA
17 Mar Apache 2 Nr Gao, Northern Mali.
09 Apr Eurocopter B3 Squirrel 1 Mazabuka, Zambia
10 Apr RH44 0 Verulam, KZN, RSA
19 Apr MIL Mi24 2 Illizi, Algiers
22 Apr Bell UH1H 2 Bainskloof, Cape Town, RSA
30 Apr RH22 0 Rand Airport, GP, RSA
30 May RH44 1 Delareyville. NW, RSA
06 Jul Hughes MD500 2 Boni Forest, Kenya
04 Sep RH44 0 28 nm from Maputo, Mozambique
16 Sep Jet Ranger 0 Worcester, WC, RSA
16 Sep AB205 0 Gwembe, Zambia
17 Sep RH44 0 Hillcrest Game Farm, NW, RSA
24 Sep AS350B2 0 West of Pelindaba, NGP, RSA
06 Oct Jet Ranger 2 Polokwane, Limpopo, RSA
15 Oct Squirrel? 4 Selous Game Reserve, Tanzania
27 Oct TBA 12 Tripoli, Libya
25 Nov Bell 407 0 Rand GF, GP, RSA
28 Nov Apache TBA Outskirts of Cairo, Egypt



04 Nov Gulfstream G159 N'Dolo Airport, Kinshasa DRC 0 Landing gear malfunction causing unscheduled return COM INC
05 Nov B737 Lagos, Nigeria 0 Pressurisation problem affected the cooling system causing unscheduled return COM



07 Nov TBA Port Elizabeth, RSA 0 Prop fell off the aircraft requiring an emergency landing on the beach PVT INC
9 Nov A330-200 Maputo, Mozambique 0 Crew received door open indication on climb out. Crew stopped climb and returned to Maputo. (Spurious dication) COM INC
17 Nov MD80 En-route Ibom Airport in Uyo to Lagos Nigeria 0 Suspected fuel leak required diversion into Port Harcourt for a maintenance inspection. Fuellers had not secured the system. COM INC
19 Nov B737-800 En-route Addis Ababa (Ethiopia) to Gaborone, Botswana 0 Lithium battery fire in a passenger's hand baggage. Two smartphone batteries had been tied together one of which was melting down. COM INC
22 Nov Hercules Masvingo, Zimbabwe 0 Engine failure required a/c to divert into Masvingo. MIL INC
26 Nov B737-400 Cape Town, RSA 0 A/C was climbing out of FACT's RWY19 when the crew was informed of a possible tail-strike, Smoke had been seen from the tail area during rotation. The crew levelled off at 8000 feet and returned to FACT. COM


Goma, DRC
Construction Hazards Unmanned aircraft. Very poor ATC. Possible volcanic activity.

Libreville, Gabon
Poor ATC coupled with inadequate navaids. Poor Marshalling combined with inappropriate behaviour of drivers on the ramp and taxiways.

Kadugli, Sudan
Poor ATC control of aircraft in the area. The runway is breaking up with only small areas in use for safe landing.

Juba, Sudan
Very poor ATC. Crews must be on the lookout for other aircraft in their vicinity. Vehicular traffic not obeying any regulations in terms of overtaking aircraft on taxiways and weaving in and out of aircraft on the apron

Bunia, DRC
Adverse weather caused by the ITCZ.


Blake Emergency Services is the International Crisis Management and Contingency Planning Consultancy who, although based in the UK, have serious experience in Africa having handled accidents, incidents, counselling, repatriation, DNA sampling and confirmation, in amongst others Lagos, Nigeria; Fez, Morocco; Pointe Noire, Congo; Moroni, Comores; Maputo, Mozambique and more recently Ukraine for MH017, Air Asia and Mali for Air Algerie. Please go to or contact

If you are interested in becoming a volunteer for Blake Emergency Services please contact Rethea at the address given above.

An Emergency Response Plan is a required section of your SMS and may also be added to your Operations Manual.


Should you wish to make a booking for any of these courses please contact Candice on 011 024 5446 or by email to

30 Nov-01 Dec Safety Management System Various R2420-00
30 Nov-04 Dec Integrated Safety Management System Various R3630-00
02-04 Dec Air Safety Officer Various R6050-00
02 Dec CRM - Refresher Verity Wallace R 1,050-00
02 Dec DG - Refresher Verity Wallace R 850-00
13 Jan 2016 CRM - Refresher Verity Wallace R 1,150-00
13 Jan 2016 DG - Refresher Verity Wallace R 935-00
18-19 Jan 2016 QA Dan Drew R 2720-00
26 Jan 2016 CRM - Refresher Verity Wallace R 1,150-00
26 Jan 2016 DG - Refresher - Verity Wallace R 935-00

On request
Part 108 Air Cargo Security Familiarisation
Doug Smit/Verity Wallace
Note: Cost per delegate includes all training materials, refreshments and lunch.
Note: Attendees paying in cash on the day are eligible for a 10% discount
Note: Both Recurrent CRM and Dangerous Goods Training Courses are available upon request - even at short notice.
First Aid and the Law, please contact
Emergency Response, Incident Response, Operations Control, Emergency Response and Family Assistance training together with the writing of Emergency Response Plans and Procedures training is now offered. For more information, please contact Rethea on or


Regional airlines in Southeast Asia are increasingly implementing inflight tracking systems, Air Transport World reported Thursday. In the aftermath of the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370, carriers including Singapore Airlines and Malaysia Airlines have reportedly signed up for SITA's Aircom composite flight tracking tool, and smaller airlines have chosen similar systems.

"We have seen some 20-30 airlines take up [Aircom] so far, and the ICAO mandate for regular time-stamped reporting next year will only push that number," said IT specialist and SITA Aircraft Solutions senior manager George Hitchins, Air Transport World reported. [The ICAO is the International Civil Aviation Organization, an agency of the United Nations.]

After the MH370 disappearance in March 2014, Hitchins said airlines have begun to "realize they had a hole in their reporting" once jets were in the air, Hitchins said.

The U.N. has also responded to the disappearance of MH370. Earlier this month, the U.N.'s World Radio Communication Conference agreed to allow satellites to receive specialized transmissions that aircraft currently send to other planes and to ground stations. The transmissions will be transmitted to satellites, which will allow real-time tracking of flights anywhere in the world, the Christian Science Monitor reported. The U.N. also set a deadline of November 2016 for adopting new tracking guidelines, including requiring aircraft to send their positions at least every 15 minutes -- or more in an emergency.

"This extends ADS-B signals beyond line-of-sight to facilitate reporting the position of aircraft equipped with ADS-B anywhere in the world, including oceanic, polar and other remote areas," the U.N.'s International Telecommunication Union's Radio communication Bureau said in a statement, the Christian Science Monitor reported.

MH370, a Boeing 777-200, disappeared in March 2014 during a flight from Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, to Beijing, with 239 people aboard. The only remnant of the plane -- a wing part called a flaperon -- was found in September on France's Reunion Island in the Indian Ocean.


Business aviation is contributing to an unprecedented effort by Flight Safety Foundation (FSF) to understand how operators collect and process safety information. The foundation considers the Global Safety Information Project (GSIP), which is funded through a cooperative agreement with the FAA, a first step toward developing a global standard for aviation data collection and analysis.

Earlier this year, the foundation (Booth C13205) held focus groups in the Asia-Pacific and North and South America regions, the two regions chosen for the project. It plans to conduct workshops in the same locations next spring to develop actual toolkits and products based on the information gathered.

"Business aviation has been participating in the focus groups," said Peter Stein, chairman of the FSF Business Advisory Committee. "Similar to the air carriers, we see data-sharing as an essential and vital tool to driving business aviation to better and better levels of safety."

Aircraft operators can now take a more proactive approach to risk mitigation through traditional safety reports and technology, including quick access recorders that measure and store hundreds of flight parameters for easy download and analysis. The GSIP is not collecting data "per se," Stein explained. "We want to know what you're doing with your data," he said. "It's not a data collection program, it's how you manage it all and (identifying) the potentials for data sharing."

More so than Part 121 air carriers, business aviation is challenged in reaping the benefits of data sharing and analysis because corporate flight departments do not generate nearly as much data as airlines that fly thousands of flights each day. "I think it underscores the importance for data-sharing within the business aviation community. We do have some opportunities to aggregate," said Stein, a corporate pilot whose own company participates in a flight-data analysis service offered by Austin Digital.

A decade ago, FSF helped introduce the business aviation community to the voluntary Flight Operational Quality Assurance (FOQA) program, which uses flight recorded data to improve aviation safety. More recently, it has encouraged greater participation by business aviation in the semi-official Aviation Safety Information Analysis & Sharing (ASIAS) program, a data-sharing effort involving the FAA and industry partners. There are presently 17 business aviation operators participating in ASIAS, along with 45 airlines.

"We're encouraging business aviation operators who already have the ability to do the digital downloads to also take a long hard look at becoming a participant in the ASIAS program," said Stein. "There's a huge benefit in that we can not only see our business aviation aggregate data, but we're also able to see airline data."

While sharing data benefits safety analysis by contributing to a greater pool of operational information, the risk of legal liability may prevent some operators from participating. Protecting operators from legal proceedings is a focus of the GSIP project, Stein said.

"What we're talking about when we talk about safety information protection is the availability of all of this data to be used in a civil and potentially criminal proceeding, a civil lawsuit for damages," he explained. "There's essentially little or no protection around the world. This is another finding that came out of these focus groups."


MAUN: The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) will next month make a decision on whether to lift the Significant Safety Concerns (SSC) slapped on Botswana aviation two years ago. If granted, the lifting of the concerns will simultaneously lead to the revocation of a suspension on licensing of new aircrafts in Botswana imposed by Civil Aviation Authority of Botswana (CAAB). CAAB halted the licensing of new aircrafts as part of conformity to solving the security concerns identified by ICAO. ICAO's December visit will be a follow up on the last mission undertaken in 2013.

Briefing the Aviation Community last week in Maun, CAAB manager for Aviation Safety Standards, Caswel Stephen said the last Botswana inspection by ICAO in April 2013 made two safety concerns in the areas of aircraft operations and airworthiness. In the area of aircraft operations, the ICAO visit revealed that major modifications and major aircraft repairs were carried out without the approval of CAAB. This was despite that CAAB airworthiness regulations of Botswana prescribe requirements for approval of modifications and repairs. However, Botswana through the CAAB has since developed procedures for airworthiness inspectors and recently issued industry guidelines pertaining to the approval of modifications and repairs.

At the time of the last mission of 2013, Botswana had just promulgated new regulations, which were in the preliminary stages of implementation. These were the Civil Aviation (Air Operator Certification and Administration) Regulations, 2013 and the Civil Aviation (Airworthiness) Regulations, 2012 which were promulgated on March 8, 2013 and March 23, 2012, respectively.

Stephen revealed that to resolve the concerns, ICAO recommended at the time, that Botswana undertake a structured evaluation of all air operators that had been issued with an Air Operator Certificate. He said ICAO also demanded that Botswana do a comprehensive structured review and evaluation of all the major modifications and major repairs embodied on Botswana registered aircraft. He said CAAB thereafter consulted extensively with industry stakeholders to discuss the matter. He reiterated that while a lot of emphasis was put on SSC resolution, the authority sensitised the industry on the importance of ensuring continuing compliance with the new regulations in general.

As a solution, CAAB recertified the licences of all the existing 12 commercial airlines in Botswana, which include Air Botswana, Flying Mission Services, Kalahari Flying Services, Major Blue Air, Kavango Air, Air Shakawe, Delta Air, Safari Air, Helicopter Horizons, Mack Air, Wilderness Air and Moremi Air. He further explained that the operators were granted new certificates and operations specifications on February 7, 2014, which were renewed in 2015 following audits by the CAAB. The process involved thorough review and approval of air operators' operational and maintenance related manuals for compliance with the new regulations.

Again, Stephen revealed that all four aircraft maintenance organisations based in Botswana were also recertified in accordance with the Five Phase Certification Process prescribed by the Civil Aviation. These included Air Botswana Engineering, Flying Mission Services, Kalahari Air Services and Northern Air Maintenance. Stephen said CAAB reviewed records of all active aircraft in the Civil Aircraft Register to ascertain that all major modifications and repairs were authorised by the authority or the former Department of Civil Aviation (DCA).

He explained that historical aircraft information was also reviewed. The authority worked closely with air operators to account for all major modifications and repairs embodied on air operator's fleet. Some of these were recertified following submission to CAAB by air operators of data substantiating conformity of repairs to regulatory requirements. He also explained that CAAB developed a database for major modifications and repairs data embodied in Botswana registered aircraft.

"CAAB is confident that it will pass the next safety audit during the next ICVM scheduled for December 2015," said Stephen.


Users of the Johannesburg aerodromes must be aware of the fact that they all take Aviation Safety and AVSEC seriously. If you want to use these airports as a Pilot or are employed in any way on them, then we would recommend that you make yourself aware of Part 139 in the SACARs and the Rules and Regulations applicable to that particular aerodrome. Be prepared for fines being levied if you breach any of the SARPs.


Next Safety Meeting - Tuesday 2nd February2016 at 09.00 in the Old Customs Hall
#The wearing of high visibility jackets/waistcoats is mandatory for all persons, excepting for passengers under escort, on airside. (SA CAR 139.02.22(6))
# Drivers found to be speeding on airside will have their access remote taken from them.
# Vehicles being driven on airside must carry proper mandatory insurance cover
# All delivery vehicles and visiting vehicles requiring access to airside MUST be escorted from the access gate to the premises and then after closure of their business back to the gate for egress.

All operators are required to report Bird Strikes to the Safety Office even if there has been no structural damage to the aircraft as a result of the strike.

Fuel must not be "trucked" into Rand Airport from other sources. Should there be a special requirement permission must be sought from the Airport Manager. The previous "block" method of charging landing fees will now cease with a discount being given to Rand Airport Air BP Customers which will amount to the same charges being levied as under the block system.

The Tower will be unmanned on Friday 25th and Saturday 26th December and Friday 1st January 2016. There will be no fuel on the 25th December 2015 and the 1st of January 2016. The Airport Rescue and Fire Fighting Services will be available as usual throughout the Festive Season between 06.00 and 18.00 hrs local time.


Next Safety, Security and Stakeholders Meeting will be held on Tuesday 11th January 2016 at 12.00 in the LIA Training School.

#The wearing of high visibility jackets/waistcoats is mandatory for all persons, excepting for passengers under escort, on airside. (SA CAR 139.02.22(6))
# Drivers shall obey the published speed limits which are 30 on airside and 40 on landside - these have been enforced as from 1st May 2015


Next Safety Meeting will be held on Tuesday 4th January 2016 at 12.00 in the Boardroom

#The wearing of high visibility jackets/waistcoats is mandatory for all persons, excepting for passengers under escort, on airside. (SA CAR 139.02.22(6))
# Drivers found to be speeding on airside will have their access revoked




Should you wish to make a donation to this more than worthy cause then please pay it (via EFT or as a deposit) into;

Standard Bank Bedford Gardens; Bank Code 018 305; Account Name: SA Air Force Association (JHB Branch); Account Number: 022 605 568. You may use either your Company or Individual name along with the word donation as the reference.

Global Aviation Consultants recently sponsored a four ball at the SAAFA Golf Day which was held at Johannesburg Country Club. We are very proud to say that our team led by Gareth Tiffin came first and second. Well done.


SITUATIONS VACANT. If you are interested and qualified please send your CV to

Part Time Consultant Air Safety Officers required who comply with the requirements of SA CARS Part 135, Part 121, Part 127, Part 140, Part 141 and Part 145 - must have had appropriate SMS training, previous experience and preferably been approved by the South African Air Services Licencing Council.

Part Time Quality Assurance Consultants required who are appropriately qualified and comply with the requirements of Part 135, Part 121, Part 127, Part 140, Part 141 and Part 145.

Part Time Aviation Security Consultant required who is appropriately qualified for RSA and International Operations


Can we help you with your aviation safety and / or quality requirements?
Under SA CAR 140.01.2 if you and your organisation hold one of the following
# a category 4 or higher aerodrome licence;
# an ATO approval;
# an aircraft maintenance organisation approval;
# a manufacturing organisation approval ;
# an ATSU approval;
# a design organisation approval;
# an AOC issued in terms of Part 121, 127, 135, 141;
# a procedure design organisation approval; and
#an electronic services organisation approval,
then you shall establish a Safety Management System for the control and supervision of the services rendered or to be rendered by that organisation.

If you do not already have an approved Air Safety Officer and an approved Safety Management System then please contact us for assistance.

We, at Global Aviation Consultants, deliver the following SA CAA Approved training courses for Air Safety Officers at Rand Airport;

# Safety Management Systems
# Integrated Safety Officer Course
# Quality Assurance Auditor
# Crew Resource Management (Initial and Recurrent)
# Dangerous Goods
# Human Factors for AME's

Should your operation be of a size whereby the full time employment of an Air Safety Officer and/or Quality Assurance Officer is not financially viable then we can provide you with Consultants who have previously held Air Services Licensing Council approval. We can also provide you with a tailor made SA CAA approved Safety Management System and all SA CAA required Manuals for your operation.

For further information on how we can help you please contact Rethea or Candice in Hanger 6, Rand Airport, Germiston on 011-024-5446/7 or e-mail

Global Aviation Consultants accepts no liability for the content of this email, or for the consequences of any actions taken on the basis of the information provided, unless that information is subsequently confirmed in writing. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

GAC News Letters

Copyright © 2024 Pilot's Post PTY Ltd
The information, views and opinions by the authors contributing to Pilotís Post are not necessarily those of the editor or other writers at Pilotís Post.