SMS required for operations into Bermuda?

[mrebuck]

Is a Safety Management System required to be in place for an operator to currently conduct operations into and out of Bermuda?

Thanks

 

[con-pilot]

At the current time there is no place where you must have SMS to operate. The formal ICAO deadline is Nov. 18, 2010.

It remains to be seen if that deadline will stay, there are rumors that this deadline will be pushed back.

But you still have to have HF radio communication ability.

 

[Gulfstream 200]

SMS again....

What does the November deadline mean? even the clowns selling SMS's for 10-20K and/or 12k/yr cant answer that one..

No, you dont need an SMS to operate anywhere, and likely wont for a long time (or at least untuil the FAA says you do?) - BUT - if you have the time you might as well get one going?

It seems like it will be inevitable, and hell, a thorough risk analysis before each departure will certainly make you safer.

:laugh:

 

[BoilerUP]

SMS again....

What does the November deadline mean? even the clowns selling SMS's for 10-20K and/or 12k/yr cant answer that one..

No, you dont need an SMS to operate anywhere, and likely wont for a long time (or at least untuil the FAA says you do?) - BUT - if you have the time you might as well get one going?

It seems like it will be inevitable, and hell, a thorough risk analysis before each departure will certainly make you safer.

:laugh:

Close-minded, hazardous attitudes like yours are exactly what SMS has to overcome in order to become universally accepted in the aviation community.

The purpose of having a safety management system isn't to meet compliance while sitting shelf collecting dust - it is a volume of procedures and best practices, developed by the best and brightest in the industry and pretty much used by people like you every day, whose implementation is vital for improving the safety culture of our industry.

A per-leg risk matrix isn't anything different than what you already consider, so why would you object to putting it on paper?

Attitudes like yours are what is holding bizav safety back - SMS is coming and you'd best get on board now to avoid the rush.

Of course, for a reasonable fee I can generate an SMS for your operation...don't trouble yourself with questions of "approval" - that'll be taken care of by the ISABO audit that is the end-all-be-all of safety.




:laugh:

 

[Gulfstream 200]

Close-minded, hazardous attitudes like yours are exactly what SMS has to overcome in order to become universally accepted in the aviation community.

The purpose of having a safety management system isn't to meet compliance while sitting shelf collecting dust - it is a volume of procedures and best practices, developed by the best and brightest in the industry and pretty much used by people like you every day, whose implementation is vital for improving the safety culture of our industry.

A per-leg risk matrix isn't anything different than what you already consider, so why would you object to putting it on paper?

Attitudes like yours are what is holding bizav safety back - SMS is coming and you'd best get on board now to avoid the rush.

Of course, for a reasonable fee I can generate an SMS for your operation...don't trouble yourself with questions of "approval" - that'll be taken care of by the ISABO audit that is the end-all-be-all of safety.




:laugh:

or my favorite....

"You dont want the French Federales putting locks on your airplane for not having an SMS and then having to explain it that your boss do you?, so give me 16K and I will make you compliant"

"The phase III audit really makes it all come together"

:0

Want a real laugh, just check out what it takes to become as ISBAO "auditor"...

LOL, its what it is, put it on the shelf and consider it done.

FWIW - FSI is supposed to be coming out with an easy template type SMS for all of us who can safely fly now and just want something to throw up when we need to.

 

[con-pilot]

Close-minded, hazardous attitudes like yours are exactly what SMS has to overcome in order to become universally accepted in the aviation community.

The purpose of having a safety management system isn't to meet compliance while sitting shelf collecting dust - it is a volume of procedures and best practices, developed by the best and brightest in the industry and pretty much used by people like you every day, whose implementation is vital for improving the safety culture of our industry.

A per-leg risk matrix isn't anything different than what you already consider, so why would you object to putting it on paper?

Attitudes like yours are what is holding bizav safety back - SMS is coming and you'd best get on board now to avoid the rush.

Of course, for a reasonable fee I can generate an SMS for your operation...don't trouble yourself with questions of "approval" - that'll be taken care of by the ISABO audit that is the end-all-be-all of safety.




:laugh:

Good Lord Almighty, how did I ever survive flying for over 40 years and 21,000 hours without an accident, incident or a violation without an SMS in the cockpit leading my way?

 

[ultrarunner]

Good Lord Almighty, how did I ever survive flying for over 40 years and 21,000 hours without an accident, incident or a violation without an SMS in the cockpit leading my way?

I was asking myself the same thing. Give me the template and I'll fill in the blanks and I'll meet the requirement.

I'll bypass the money grabbers that will "put it together for me" thank you very much.....

 

[con-pilot]

I was asking myself the same thing. Give me the template and I'll fill in the blanks and I'll meet the requirement.

I'll bypass the money grabbers that will "put it together for me" thank you very much.....

And then throw it on the bookshelf to collect dust.

 

[BoilerUP]

And then throw it on the bookshelf to collect dust.

I wonder if the risk matrix includes points for how much dust the SMS manual has on top of it...

 

[ultrarunner]

And then throw it on the bookshelf to collect dust.

Oh no, I'll make a copy for the airplane, in REALLY small fonts, since invariably, some some little icao pencil prick will ramp us one day and want to see it! Likely the same pencil pricks that want to see that W&B upon landing in the EU.

 

[gulfstream2345]

If you are a commercial operator you have to have a SMS now to operate legally in the EU and other places. The Nov. 18the requirement is for everyone else that operates turbojets. For those of you that don't think this is an issue just try explaining to your boss why you can't fly the airplane out of Nice or Paris because you don't have a SMS. The FAA does not require a SMS because they submitted a deviation to the ICAO rule. If you are flying in a country that does require a SMS and you don't have one, the aircraft is subject to fines and/or seizure.

As far as the requirement to become an IS-BAO auditor, just give it a try. There is a lot more to it that you think. I am one and it wasn't easy.

And if you don't want to use a SMS after you have one, good luck. Try being a professional.

 

[Gulfstream 200]

If you are a commercial operator you have to have a SMS now to operate legally in the EU and other places. The Nov. 18the requirement is for everyone else that operates turbojets. For those of you that don't think this is an issue just try explaining to your boss why you can't fly the airplane out of Nice or Paris because you don't have a SMS. The FAA does not require a SMS because they submitted a deviation to the ICAO rule. If you are flying in a country that does require a SMS and you don't have one, the aircraft is subject to fines and/or seizure.

As far as the requirement to become an IS-BAO auditor, just give it a try. There is a lot more to it that you think. I am one and it wasn't easy.

And if you don't want to use a SMS after you have one, good luck. Try being a professional.

We can be fined and the aircraft can be seized after Nov 18th for not having an SMS?

 

[AeroDork]

And if you don't want to use a SMS after you have one, good luck. Try being a professional.

You know, because we weren't before some bureaucratic paper shufflers got together and came up with a system to keep more paper shufflers employed. I personally crashed 18 planes before we had our SMS in place. Now I haven't even had one close call since I've became a pro at filling out a risk matrix.

Now which consultant do I send the $12000 check to again?

 

[Choppy]

Just label chapter 2 "Safety Management Procedures" and show that to the inspector! Nobody knows what a true SMS is! Certainly not the inspector in Nice! It's insane. Show him your W&B and a Risk analysis for the trip and that's all they know!!!

 

[stupidpilot]

SMS again....

What does the November deadline mean? even the clowns selling SMS's for 10-20K and/or 12k/yr cant answer that one..

No, you dont need an SMS to operate anywhere, and likely wont for a long time (or at least untuil the FAA says you do?) - BUT - if you have the time you might as well get one going?

It seems like it will be inevitable, and hell, a thorough risk analysis before each departure will certainly make you safer.

:laugh:

It can be done on the cheap but it takes a whole lot of work. And we found an auditor that only costs $2500 to do an audit. Not so bad all in all.

 

[sleepy]

We are IS-BAO. We just took the programs we developed for IS-BAO and filled them into the ICAO SMS formate, made it into a document that even a Frenchman could understand and put it in the aircraft. Most people probably have the framework already in place for ICAO compliance. I don't see any need to pay someone to do it for you.

 

[gulfstream2345]

Sms

Yes in a foreign country. France is notorious for just that. We had a crew, years ago, and the copilot didn't have a SIC type rating. They couldn't depart France until a type rated pilot was flown over. That was when the EU required SIC types and the FAA didn't. Same will happen for SMS.

 

[gulfstream2345]

Unfortunately the answer is yes. We had a crew in France when the SIC type requirement was in effect for the EU but not the FAA. The airplane was delayed until a typed pilot showed up. The same will be happening with SMS. The EU folks, especially France, are always looking for ways to stick it to "N" airplanes.

 

[gulfstream2345]

I didn't write the rules but we all have to live with them. If you would like to fly to France after Nov. 18th without a SMS and put your airplane and job at risk then that is your choice.

 

[bbwest]

Boilerup is right!! I think I'm older than most in here but I remain amazed at the "20k hours havent had a scratch, I got all the answers, why do I need this crap" guys.

Reminds me of my dad 30 years ago when I suggested he wear a seatbelt.

The guys who think they've got it wired are usually the guys who need it most. There are a lot of clowns in this business masquerading as professionals. Guys who think its a good idea to disable the EGPWS callouts (50-30-20-10) because they are distracting, guys who dont know how to extend a centerline from the runway in an FMS let alone build a glideslope (ie going into someplace at night w out a precision approach), guys who refuse to get on board with challenge and response checklists.

The NBAA and IS-BAO folks spout a lot of misleading info relative to accident statistics and bizav. We should be doing nearly everything in the cockpit the way 121 and 135 folks do it. We should all be incorporating best practices and simply what is safest. What you like is irrelevant.

 

[BoilerUP]

Boilerup is right!!

I was being sarcastic.

A competent, professional flight crew doesn't need an SMS to tell them how operate the aircraft in a safe manner, or how to mitigate operational risk, or that they should utilize industry best practices...because there's nothing on a "risk matrix" that a competent, professional flight crew hasn't already considered.

A cottage industry has sprung up around these SMS mandates to get operators in "compliance" for a fee, except that nobody (not even the "experts") can tell you exactly what the criteria are for compliance other than "If you're ISBAO, you're good."

That's unacceptable to me and it should be to pretty much everybody else.

I buy into the concept of SMS, but thus far its implementation and execution (especially for a small, one or two plane, two-four pilot operation), not to mention regulatory guidance, has been terrible.

 

[bbwest]

In that case I disagree with Boilerup. The one and two plane operations are exactly the ones that need guidance and oversight.

Too many in this business think they are smarter than the rules, they have 15k hours and dont need that or this. I submit the following trend - the professionals in this business are always listening, reading, open to doing things the best way; the others- the know it alls, who are usually more screwed up than Hogans goat, are the guys who are most resistant and are the guys who need it the most.

Why do ALL 121 operators have Safety programs? Why do ALL 135 operators have safety programs? So we in the 91 world are smarter and better than them? They need it and we don't?

Pure dillusion if you believe that.

 

[BoilerUP]

The one and two plane operations are exactly the ones that need guidance and oversight.

Guidance and oversight? Really? Guidance and oversight by whom?

I submit the following trend - the professionals in this business are always listening, reading, open to doing things the best way

I agree with that 100%...I just don't think I, or any other true aviation professional, needs a manual in a 2" binder and a per-leg risk matrix to tell us how to do those things - we've already been doing them.

Why do ALL 121 operators have Safety programs? Why do ALL 135 operators have safety programs?

Because they are air carriers, who extend themselves to the public for common carriage. As such, they have safety programs because they HAVE to per FAR in the interest of the flying public who could be put at risk by an air carrier who might place revenue ahead of safety.

My airplane isn't public.

That same argument could be made to why 91 passengers aren't screened against the No Fly List or have their luggage x-rayed. And such an argument would contain the same logical fallacies.

So we in the 91 world are smarter and better than them? They need it and we don't?

Look, I'm not saying that Part 91 operators couldn't benefit from a safety program, and I'm certainly not saying we're "smarter" or "better" than 121/135 operations. What I am saying is our operations are different than theirs, and boilerplate solutions from air carriers simply don't work for private operators. A truly effective SMS requires everybody, from the lowest person in the department to whomever the department reports to in the management structure, to buy into its concept and application. In the airline world, its easy - you fly for us you do what we say. In the 91 world, where airplanes aren't in management's core competency and its a tool instead of a revenue-generating device, and management isn't going to support something that costs them money with no tangible increase in safety (because again, a professional crew already does that which most SMS programs call for, in the span of about 30 seconds without needlessly killing any trees).

The FAA still has not issued any guidance telling Part 91 operators what their criteria for "compliance" is, and because of this, nobody knows what must be included for a program to be "APPROVED".

Why waste time and money, propping up the cottage industry of consultants & auditors that has sprung up the last couple years following the ICAO mandate, when the FAA hasn't yet required it or told us what it will need to include?