---

APPROACH CONSIDERATIONS:

In its safety library briefing notes, Airbus has identified that the majority of fatal accidents occur during the descent till landing stages of the flight. The breakdown given is:

1. Descent - Percentage of fatal accidents : 5%
2. Initial Approah - Precentage of fatal accidents: 10%
3. Final Approach - Percentage of fatal accidents: 9%
4. Landing - Percentage of fatal accidents: 24%

It found that the total fatalities in the phases for the period of 1998 – 2007 was 1960.

From the studies done, three main threats have been identified:

1. threats to situational awareness
2. threats to decision making
3. threats to communication

THE THREATS AND THE MITIGATING ACTIONS:

SITUATIONAL AWARENESS THREATS:

INCORRECT PERCEPTION

Mitigating Actions:

• trust in the instruments
• crosschecking and verifying with fellow crewmembers and ATC
• maintain situational awareness through the use of navaids, ATC track miles and RT

INCORRECT PROCESSING:

Mitigating Actions:

• Maintain SOP
• knowledge of technical aspects of the aircraft – FMC and Mode Control Panel
• if you are being rushed – buy time

INCORRECT PROJECTION:

Mitigating Actions:

• keep questioning by comparing your mental model with the evolving situation
• understand, respect and react to all warnings
• knowing and respecting your own limitation and red flags

DECISION MAKING THREATS:

RUSHED FOR A SOLUTION:

Mitigating Actions:

• Set a timeline for decision making, communicating this deadline and soliciting inputs from fellow colleagues
• review task allocations, allowing time for decision making
• delegate duties to fellow crewmembers

USING A SET/ PREPLANNED SOLUTION:

Mitigating actions:

• understanding that not all situations have the same solutions
• question if all possibilities have been considered
• engage other crewmembers by soliciting for inputs and solutions

INCORRECT BASIS - TECHNICAL /PROCEDURAL:

Mitigating actions:

• adhere to SOP
• usage of policy and procedures as a guide

COMMUNICATION THREATS:

LANGUAGE ISSUES:

Mitigating Actions:

• usage of standard RT phraseology
• verification of clearances when in doubt

COMPLICATED CLEARANCES - MULTIPLE CLEARANCES:

Mitigating actions:

• write down clearances for reference
• verification of clearances when in doubt
• slow down the pace – read back clearances slowly

MISCOMMUNICATION BETWEEN CREWMEMBERS:

Mitigating actions:

• usage of a single language in the flight deck – English
• adhere to SOP – standard callouts and phrases
• maintain sterile cockpit

APPROACH BRIEFING:

The approach briefing is a good tool to mitigate the threats associated with the approach phase by:

• establishing and sharing of mental models, review of threats and working plan
• reviewing and deciding task and role allocation – who does what at what time. Segregation of PF and PM roles
• reinforcing the lines of communication between crewmembers
• setting “gates” and bottom lines for acceptance of changes with regards to safety. For an example, the latest time the aircraft should be stabilised or a change of runway accepted
• the time a risk analysis and assessment is done. For an example, the availability of navaids, lighting system, communication, high ground and visual perspective (day/night).

REFERENCES:

Approach techniques. Flight Operations Briefing Notes, Airbus. Retrieved on 20 September 2010, from http://www.airbus.com/fileadmin/media_gallery/files/safety_library_items/AirbusSafetyLib_-FLT_OPS-APPR-SEQ01.pdf.

Want to know more?

---

Contributors to this page

Authors / Editors

basics101-