DOCSLIB.ORG

E U R Op E a N a V Ia T Ion S a F E T Y a G E Nc Y an N U Al

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
E U R Op E a N a V Ia T Ion S a F E T Y a G E Nc Y an N U Al ANNUAL SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS REVIEW 2016 SAFETYANNUAL RECOMMENDATIONS EUROPEAN AVIATION SAFETY AVIATION EUROPEAN AGENCY EUROPEAN AVIATION SAFETY AGENCY SAFETY ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH DEPARTMENT Designed in Luxembourg Strategy & Safety Management Directorate Safety Intelligence & Performance Department Annual Safety Recommendations Review 2016 Disclaimer: Neither the European Aviation Safety Agency, nor any person acting on behalf of the European Aviation Safety Agency is responsible for the use which might be made of the following information. The Annual Safety Recommendations Review is produced by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA). This edition provides an overview of the safety recommendations that have been addressed to EASA in 2016. It also presents the replies produced during the year. This annual review aims at providing a feedback on the follow-up given to safety recommendations in the con- text of openness, transparency and accountability that characterises the European Public Administration. Apart from its safety related information character, this review is also expected to provide relevant information related to raised safety concerns, both for EASA itself, as well as its stakeholders, including the European public. © European Aviation Safety Agency, 2016. All rights reserved. Proprietary document. Printed copies are not controlled. Confirm revision status through the EASA-Internet site: www.easa.europa.eu. 2016 Annual Safety Recommendations Review PAGE 3 Foreword by the Executive Director I am pleased to introduce the 10th edition of the Annual Safety Recommendations Review, which provides infor- mation on the activity of the Agency in 2016 in the field of safety investigation and follow-up. In addition, the review highlights a range of safety issues and the Agency’s safety improvement efforts that are of interest to the European Aviation Community and the public. During the last 10 years the Agency has become the main actor in safety investigation follow-up within Europe through rigorously processing safety recommendations that have been addressed to it. Owing to EASA’s posi- tioning in the system, the Agency is able to take action with respect to systemic problems and other issues in the management of risk. The implementation of safety recommendations provides tangible improvements in safety as a result of infor- mation that has been learned during safety investigations. In Europe, the methodical approach to investigatory work and the implementation of recommendations brings some meaning to the loss experienced as a result of accidents. During 2016, Safety Investigation Authorities from 18 different States addressed 88 safety recommendations to EASA in the context of the Agency’s remit. Therefore, the handling of the safety recommendations in both an ex- peditious and responsible manner constitutes one of the pivotal responsibilities for EASA. EASA also monitors safety recommendations issued to other aviation and non-aviation addressees. As during 2015, the number of recommendations that were issued to non-aviation addressees has continued to increase in 2016. Such recommendations include those related to drones, research, crew employment, passenger health and criminal acts. Updating the EASA Basic Regulation will aid the Agency to better regulate, thereby giving ef- fect to safety recommendations. This further illustrates the dynamic nature of the aviation environment and it also means that the framework in which the Agency operates must be continuously reviewed. In preparing for the challenges ahead, areas for consideration include the safety of ground handling services and security aspects of aircraft and aviation system design, including cybersecurity. Despite the fluidity of the avia- tion environment created by external factors and technological changes, the system will continue to ensure safe and secure air transport for passengers and the general public. Patrick Ky Executive Director 2016 Annual Safety Recommendations Review PAGE 4 Contents Foreword by the Executive Director 3 0 Abbreviation list 7 1 Introduction 9 2 Safety Recommendations received in 2016 12 2.1 Overview of Safety Recommendations received in 2016..................................................................12 2.2 Origin of the Safety Recommendations received in 2016 ................................................................14 2.3 Involvement in the safety investigations ...........................................................................................16 3 Safety Recommendations replies in 2016 19 3.1 Overview of Safety Recommendations replies in 2016.....................................................................19 3.2 Status of the Safety Recommendations replies in 2016 ....................................................................20 4 Overview of key safety topics processed and actions carried out in 2016 24 4.1 Medical and psychological conditions of flight crew ������������������������������������������������������������������������25 4.2 Helicopter Offshore Operations .........................................................................................................26 4.3 Collisions warning systems for general aviation to mitigate the risk of Mid-air collision/ Near mid-air collision (MAC/NMAC) ..................................................................................................28 4.4 Erroneous Parameters at Take-off ......................................................................................................29 4.5 Cabin Air Quality ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������29 4.6 Aircraft localisation and flight recorders ...........................................................................................31 4.7 Risks posed by Lithium Batteries on Board........................................................................................33 4.8 Loss of Control Prevention and Recovery Training ............................................................................34 4.9 Security Related (SEC) events .............................................................................................................36 4.10 Unmanned Aircraft (Systems) .............................................................................................................37 5 Conclusions 40 ANNEX A: List of 2016 Safety Recommendations Replies 42 ANNEX B: Definitions 213 ANNEX C: Safety Recommendations classification 217 2016 Annual Safety Recommendations Review PAGE 5 List of Figures Figure 1: Safety Recommendations addressed to EASA per year .......................................................... 12 Figure 2: Safety Recommendations by occurrence class per year ......................................................... 13 Figure 3: Safety Recommendations received in 2016 by aircraft category ........................................... 13 Figure 4: Origin of Safety Recommendations received by EASA ........................................................... 14 Figure 5: States contribution to Safety Recommendations received in 2016 ....................................... 16 Figure 6: EASA responses to safety recommendations in 2016 by year received ................................. 19 Figure 7: Safety Recommendation Responses sent in 2016 ................................................................... 20 Figure 8: Received response assessments of EASA Final Replies sent in 2016 (Status: 14.03.2017) .................................................................................................................................. 21 Figure 9: Assessment EASA received on the Final Responses sent in 2016 [total] (Status: 14.03.2017) .................................................................................................................................. 22 Figure 10: Safety Recommendations addressed to EASA per topic....................................................... 24 CHAPTER 0 CHAPTER 1 CHAPTER 2 CHAPTER 3 CHAPTER 4 CHAPTER 5 Abbreviation list ANNEX A. ANNEX B. ANNEX C. 2016 Annual Safety Recommendations Review Abbreviation list PAGE 7 Abbreviation list AD Airworthiness Directive AFM Aircraft Flight Manual AAIB UK Air Accidents Investigation Branch United Kingdom AMC Acceptable Means of Compliance ANSV Italian National Agency for the Safety of Flight BEA Bureau d’Enquête et d’Analyse pour l’Aviation Civile CAT Commercial Air Transport CM Certification Memo CRI Certification Review Item CRM Crew Resource Management CS Certification Specifications CS-LSA Certification Specifications for Light Sport Aeroplanes CVR Cockpit voice recorder DSB Dutch Safety Board ELT Emergency Locator Transmitter ENCASIA European Network of Civil Aviation Safety Investigation Authorities EPAS European Plan for Aviation Safety ETOPS Extended Operation ETSO European Technical Standard Order EU European Union FAA Federal Aviation Administration FCOM Flight Crew Operating Manual FDM Flight Data Monitoring GA General Aviation GM Guidance Material HOFO Helicopter Offshore Operations ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization ICCAIA International Coordination Council for Aerospace Industry Associations ILS Instrument Landing System LOC-I Loss of control-inflight MOPSC Maximum Operational Passenger Seating Configuration MS Member States NCO Non-Commercial operations with Other than complex motor-powered aircraft PED Portable Electronic Devices RE Runway Excursion RMT Rulemaking task SIA Safety
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Vol. 81 Thursday, No. 174 September 8, 2016 Pages 61973–62352
    Vol. 81 Thursday, No. 174 September 8, 2016 Pages 61973–62352 OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL REGISTER VerDate Sep 11 2014 22:15 Sep 07, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\08SEWS.LOC 08SEWS sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with FRONT MATTER WS II Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 174 / Thursday, September 8, 2016 The FEDERAL REGISTER (ISSN 0097–6326) is published daily, SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES Monday through Friday, except official holidays, by the Office PUBLIC of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, Washington, DC 20408, under the Federal Register Subscriptions: Act (44 U.S.C. Ch. 15) and the regulations of the Administrative Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 Committee of the Federal Register (1 CFR Ch. I). The Assistance with public subscriptions 202–512–1806 Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office, Washington, DC 20402 is the exclusive distributor of the official General online information 202–512–1530; 1–888–293–6498 edition. Periodicals postage is paid at Washington, DC. Single copies/back copies: The FEDERAL REGISTER provides a uniform system for making Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by Assistance with public single copies 1–866–512–1800 Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and (Toll-Free) Executive Orders, Federal agency documents having general FEDERAL AGENCIES applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published Subscriptions: by act of Congress, and other Federal agency documents of public interest. Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions: Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of the Email [email protected] Federal Register the day before they are published, unless the Phone 202–741–6000 issuing agency requests earlier filing.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of Factors
    SYSTEM SAFETY ASSESSMENT COURSE June 2017 COMMON CAUSE FAILURES, PARTICULAR RISKS AND ZONAL SAFETY ANALYSIS R.G.W. Cherry & Associates Limited 2017. All rights reserved - 1 - SYSTEM SAFETY ASSESSMENT COURSE June 2017 1 Common Cause Failures Common Cause Failures are often the limiting factor on the integrity of complex systems, and yet they are often overlooked in the safety assessment process. In this module consideration is given to the various forms of Common Cause Failures that have the potential for compromising the reliability of aircraft systems and the possible methods for identifying them during the design process. 1.1 THEORY V PRACTICE It is normally expected that if the probability of failure of one channel in a given period is X and there are N channels, any of which may achieve the intended function, then the probability of all channels failing is: XN …………………. Equation 1 The impact of Common Cause Failures on an aircraft electrical power generation system was assessed from a study carried out by Hawker Siddeley Aviation in the 1970s. The study was carried out on an in-service aircraft that had three otherwise independent electrical power generation channels. For this aircraft, the average failure rate for each of the channels was found to be approximately: 9.5 x 10-4 per flight Now if the aircraft had only two electrical power generation channels then the probability of both failing due to independent causes might be expected to be :- (9.5 x 10-4)2 per flight = 9 x 10-7 per flight (approx.) And for the three-channel system: (9.5 x 10-4)3 per flight = 8.6 x 10-10 per flight (approx.) However, when the in-service record for the subject aircraft was investigated it was found that multi-channel failures occurred at a much greater frequency than predicted by this simple theoretical approach.
    [Show full text]
  • A Zonal Safety Analysis Methodology for Preliminary Aircraft Systems and Structural Design
    A Zonal Safety Analysis Methodology for Preliminary Aircraft Systems and Structural Design Chen, Z. and Fielding, J. P. School of Aerospace, Transport and Manufacturing, Cranfield University ABSTRACT Zonal Safety Analysis (ZSA) is a major part of the civil aircraft safety assessment process described in Aerospace Recommended Practice 4761 (ARP4761). It considers safety effects that systems/items installed in the same zone (i.e. a defined area within the aircraft body) may have on each other. Although the ZSA may be conducted at any design stage, it would be most cost-effective to do it during preliminary design, due to the greater opportunity for influence on system and structural designs and architecture. The existing ZSA methodology of ARP4761 was analysed but it was found to be more suitable for detail design rather than preliminary design. The authors therefore developed a methodology that would be more suitable for preliminary design and named it the Preliminary Zonal Safety Analysis (PZSA). This new methodology was verified by means of the use of a case-study, based on the NASA N3-X project. Several lessons were learnt from the case study, leading to refinement of the proposed method. These lessons included focusing on the positional layout of major components for the zonal safety inspection, and using the Functional Hazard Analysis (FHA)/Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) to identify system external failure modes. The resulting PZSA needs further refinement, but should prove to be a useful design tool for the preliminary design process. _____________________________________ INTRODUCTION This paper outlines the development of a methodology, hereafter referred to as the Preliminary Zonal Safety Historically, system safety analysis was primarily based Analysis (PZSA).
    [Show full text]
  • Saalfelden - Maria Alm - Hinterthal - Dienten Am Hochkönig 620 Enthält Auch Fahrten Der Linie 631
    Saalfelden - Maria Alm - Hinterthal - Dienten am Hochkönig 620 enthält auch Fahrten der Linie 631 Gültig ab 09.12.2018 Montag bis Freitag Samstag Linienkursnummer 620 620 620 620 620 620 620 620 620 620 620 620 620 620 620 620 631 620 620 620 620 620 620 620 620 620 620 620 620 Verkehrsbeschränkung S S S S F 17 17 17 Hinweise X X X HOG Schüttdorf Gymnasium/HAK ab 13.20 Saalfelden Bahnhof an 13.41 Saalfelden Bahnhof ab 6.37 8.10 9.10 10.10 11.10 12.24 13.16 13.41 14.10 14.10 15.10 16.09 17.20 18.10 6.37 8.10 9.10 10.10 11.10 12.24 13.16 14.10 15.10 16.09 Saalfelden Schulzentrum (Bf) b12.25 13.17 b13.17 b16.10 Saalfelden Birkengasse 6.38 8.11 9.11 10.11 11.11 12.26 13.18 14.11 14.11 15.11 16.11 17.21 18.11 6.38 8.11 9.11 10.11 11.11 12.26 13.18 14.11 15.11 16.11 Saalfelden Bäckergasse 6.39 8.12 9.12 10.12 11.12 12.27 13.19 14.12 14.12 15.12 16.12 17.22 18.12 6.39 8.12 9.12 10.12 11.12 12.27 13.19 14.12 15.12 16.12 Saalfelden Postamt 5.59 6.41 8.15 9.15 10.15 11.15 12.33 13.21 13.45 13.45 14.15 14.15 15.15 16.15 17.28 18.15 5.59 6.41 8.15 9.15 10.15 11.15 12.33 13.21 14.15 15.15 16.15 Saalfelden Rathausplatz 6.00 6.43 8.17 9.17 10.17 11.17 12.35 13.23 13.23 13.47 14.17 14.17 15.17 16.17 17.30 18.17 6.00 6.43 8.17 9.17 10.17 11.17 12.35 13.23 14.17 15.17 16.17 Saalfelden HTL/HBLA 6.01 6.44 8.18 9.18 10.18 11.18 12.37 13.24 13.24 13.48 14.18 14.18 15.18 16.18 17.32 18.18 6.01 6.44 8.18 9.18 10.18 11.18 12.37 13.24 14.18 15.18 16.18 Saalfelden Grünhäuslsiedlung 6.02 6.45 8.19 9.19 10.19 11.19 12.38 13.24 13.25 13.49 14.19 14.19 15.19 16.19
    [Show full text]
  • TEMPLATE CRYSTAL DELIVERABLE Use Case Descriptions
    PROPRIETARY RIGHTS STATEMENT THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION, WHICH IS PROPRIETARY TO THE CRYSTAL CONSORTIUM. NEITHER THIS DOCUMENT NOR THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN SHALL BE USED, DUPLICATED OR COMMUNICATED BY ANY MEANS TO ANY THIRD PARTY, IN WHOLE OR IN PARTS, EXCEPT WITH THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE CESAR CONSORTIUM THIS RESTRICTION LEGEND SHALL NOT BE ALTERED OR OBLITERATED ON OR FROM THIS DOCUMENT. THE RESEARCH LEADING TO THESE RESULTS HAS RECEIVED FUNDING FROM THE EUROPEAN UNION’S SEVENTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAM (FP7/2007-2013) FOR CRYSTAL – CRITICAL SYSTEM ENGINEERING ACCELERATION JOINT UNDERTAKING UNDER GRANT AGREEMENT N° 332830 AND FROM SPECIFIC NATIONAL PROGRAMS AND / OR FUNDING AUTHORITIES. CRitical SYSTem Engineering AcceLeration Use – Case Definition Simulation for PRA D210.010 D210.010 Simulation for PRA DOCUMENT INFORMATION Project CRYSTAL Grant Agreement No. ARTEMIS-2012-1-332830 Deliverable Title Simulation for PRA Deliverable No. D210.010 Dissemination Level CO Nature R Document Version V01.02 Date 2014-01-29 Contact Odile Laurent Organization A-F Phone + 33 5 61 18 12 76 E-Mail [email protected] Version Nature Date Page V01.02 R 2014-01-29 2 of 42 D210.010 Simulation for PRA AUTHORS TABLE Name Company E-Mail Odile Laurent A-F [email protected] Hélène Moutier A-F [email protected] REVIEW TABLE Version Date Reviewer V01.00 2013-12-20 Hélène Moutier V01.01 2014-01-13 Jean-Luc Johnson V01.01 2014-01-20 Ralf Bogusch CHANGE HISTORY Pages Version Date Reason for Change Affected V01.00 2013-12-16 Initial version V01.01 2013-12-20 Internal review 13,14,15,18,31,38 V01.02 2014-01-22 External reviews Version Nature Date Page V01.02 R 2014-01-29 3 of 42 D210.010 Simulation for PRA CONTENT 1 INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Aircraft Fire Protection
    Applied Science Ingenieurbüro Dieter Scholz Seevering 53 D - 21629 Neu Wulmstorf Aircraft Fire Protection Dieter Scholz April 2006 Report prepared for Minimax GmbH & Co KG Industriestraße 10/12 D - 23840 Bad Oldesloe Aircraft Fire Protection 2 Table of Contents page Abbreviations ............................................................................................................ 4 1 Setting the Scene ........................................................................................................ 5 2 Introduction to Aircraft Systems ............................................................................ 7 2.1 Aircraft Systems General ............................................................................................ 7 2.2 Definitions .................................................................................................................. 9 2.3 Breakdown ................................................................................................................ 10 2.4 Certification .............................................................................................................. 12 2.5 Safety and Reliability ............................................................................................... 13 2.6 Mass .......................................................................................................................... 18 2.7 Power ........................................................................................................................ 21 2.8 Costs and
    [Show full text]
  • Via Alpina and Ruperti Trail
    VIA ALPINA AND RUPERTI TRAIL THE LONG DISTANCE HIKING LOOP THROUGH 5 NATIONAL PARKS AND 3 COUNTRIES Editor and Publisher: National Secretariat Via Alpina Austria and Germany, Department of Spatial Planning and Nature Conservation of the Austrian Alpine Association (OeAV) Texts: Triglav National Park Management, Gesäuse National Park Management, Kalkalpen National Park Management, Berchtesgaden National Park Management, Hohe Tauern National Park Management, Via Alpina National Secretariat Austria and Germany, Peter Šilak, Franz Genger, Rudi Felber, Arnold Kreditsch, Susanne Schwab, Erika and Fritz Käfer, Christina Schwann Extracts from the OeAV (Austrian Alpine Association) yearbooks of 1961, 1968, 1976, hiking guide “Österreichischer Weitwanderweg 10 (Rupertiweg)” (Austrian Long-Dis- tance Hiking Trail 10, Ruperti Trail) by Erika and Fritz Käfer, privately published by the long-distance hiking section of the Austrian Alpine Association, 2007. Translations: German - English: Markus Wieland, Steve Tomlin Maps: Latitude-Cartagène / Geosys-Mona / Teleatlas / Network of Alpine protected areas, Randonnées Créations (Jean-Philippe Repiquet), Art’Graphi Créations (Sophie Simon) Reproduction with consent from the BEV – Bundesamt für Eich- und Vermessungswesen (Federal Office for Calibration and Measurement) in Vienna, EB 2008/00307, p. 32. Layout and Graphic Design: Christina Schwann - National Secretariat Via Alpina Austria and Germany, Department of Spatial Planning and Nature Conservation of the Austrian Alpine Association (OeAV) Printing: Samson Druck GmbH - St. Margarethen Cover Pictures: f.l.: “View on the Königssee with the Watzmann east wall” – Berchtesgaden National Park Management; “Reißeck balcony trail” – G. Mussnig, Hohe Tauern National Park Management – Carinthia; The “Goldlochquelle” (Golden Lair Fountain) – F. Sieghartsleitner, Kalkalpen National Park Management; “On the top of the Črna prst” – F.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Safety Recommendations Review 2011 FINAL
    European Aviation Safety Agency Safety Analysis and Research Department Executive Directorate 2011 Annual Safety Recommendations review Executive Directorate- Safety Analysis and Research Page 1/114 © European Aviation Safety Agency, 20 10 . All rights reserved. Proprietary document. Printed copies are not controlled. Confirm revision status through the EASA-Internet/Intranet. 2011 Annual Safety Recommendations review Document ref. Status Date Contact name and address for enquiries: European Aviation Safety Agency Safety Analysis and Research Postfach 10 12 53 50452 Köln - Germany Information on EASA is available at: www.easa.europa.eu Disclaimer : Neither the European Aviation Safety Agency, nor any person acting on behalf of the European Aviation Safety Agency is responsible for the use which might be made of the following information. Authorisation : Name Signature Date Prepared Dominique Verdoni 05/03/2012 Reviewed 1 Bernard Bourdon 27/03/2012 Reviewed 2 Authorised John Vincent 27/03/2012 Executive Directorate- Safety Analysis and Research Page 2/114 © European Aviation Safety Agency, 20 10 . All rights reserved. Proprietary document. Printed copies are not controlled. Confirm revision status through the EASA-Internet/Intranet. Table of Contents 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 5 2 Overview of Safety Recommendations in 2011 ................................................................ 6 2.1 Safety recommendations received in 2011 ..............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Explanatory Note to TCDS EASA.A.110 – Airbus 380 - Issue 03
    Explanatory Note to TCDS EASA.A.110 – Airbus 380 - Issue 03 This annex to the EASA TCDS IM.A.110 was created to publish selected special conditions / deviations / equivalent safety findings that are part of the applicable certification basis: Table of Contents: Certification Review Items: B-01 SC & IM: Stalling and scheduled operating speeds ....................................................................3 B-02 SC: Motion and Effect of Cockpit Control .................................................................................9 B-04 SC &IM: Static Directional, Lateral and Longitudinal Stability and Low energy awareness ..10 B-05 SC: Flight envelope protection ..................................................................................................13 B-06 SC: Normal load factor limiting system ....................................................................................15 B-10 SC: Human factor evaluation of novel features in the flight deck ............................................16 B-15 SC: Soft Go Around mode ........................................................................................................17 C-01 SC & IM: Crashworthiness of Large Aircraft Structures ..........................................................19 C-02 SC: Discrete Gust ......................................................................................................................21 C-03 SC & IM : Loading conditions for multi-leg landing gear ........................................................22 C-04 SC: Undercarriage
    [Show full text]
  • TEMPLATE CRYSTAL DELIVERABLE Use Case Descriptions
    PROPRIETARY RIGHTS STATEMENT THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION, WHICH IS PROPRIETARY TO THE CRYSTAL CONSORTIUM. NEITHER THIS DOCUMENT NOR THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN SHALL BE USED, DUPLICATED OR COMMUNICATED BY ANY MEANS TO ANY THIRD PARTY, IN WHOLE OR IN PARTS, EXCEPT WITH THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE CESAR CONSORTIUM THIS RESTRICTION LEGEND SHALL NOT BE ALTERED OR OBLITERATED ON OR FROM THIS DOCUMENT. THE RESEARCH LEADING TO THESE RESULTS HAS RECEIVED FUNDING FROM THE EUROPEAN UNION’S SEVENTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAM (FP7/2007-2013) FOR CRYSTAL – CRITICAL SYSTEM ENGINEERING ACCELERATION JOINT UNDERTAKING UNDER GRANT AGREEMENT N° 332830 AND FROM SPECIFIC NATIONAL PROGRAMS AND / OR FUNDING AUTHORITIES. CRitical SYSTem Enginieering AcceLeration Use Case Definition Airbus-Germany Environmental Control Systems D201.011 Environmental Control D201.011 Systems DOCUMENT INFORMATION Project CRYSTAL Grant Agreement No. ARTEMIS-2012-1-332830 Deliverable Title Environmental Control Systems Deliverable No. D201.011 Dissemination Level CO Nature R Document Version V1.0 Date 2014-01-29 Contact Dietmar Sander Organization A-G Phone +49 40 743 64199 E-Mail [email protected] Version Nature Date Page V01.00 R 2014-01-29 2 of 35 Environmental Control D201.011 Systems AUTHORS TABLE Name Company E-Mail Dietmar Sander Airbus Operations GmbH [email protected] Arne Rosenbohm Airbus Operations GmbH [email protected] Mathias Maruhn Airbus Operations GmbH [email protected] REVIEW TABLE Version Date Reviewer 0.2 24.1.2014 Andreas Mitschke – Airbus Group Innovations 0.2 24.1.2014 Thomas Kuhn – Fraunhofer IESE CHANGE HISTORY Pages Version Date Reason for Change Affected 0.1 20.9.2013 Initial Description all 0.2 20.12.2013 Draft Version all 1.0 29.1.2014 First Version after review all Version Nature Date Page V01.00 R 2014-01-29 3 of 35 Environmental Control D201.011 Systems CONTENT 1 INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Adventure Excursions
    ADVENTURE EXCURSIONS WINTER 2020/2021 www.zellamsee-kaprun.com 2 ZELL AM SEE KAPRUN 1 Schmittenhöhe Kitzsteinhorn – THE Glacier 2 Ski Touring Mountain Ronachkopf Alpine Coaster Maisi Flitzer 3 Star-studded cruises on lake Zell TAUERN SPA Zell am See-Kaprun 4 Ice Rink – Freizeitzentrum Vötter’s Oldtimer Museum 5 Indoor Swimming Pool Castle Kaprun 6 Toboggan Run Köhlergraben Kaprun Museum 7 Museum Vogtturm Toboggan Run Guggenbichl 8 Casino Zell am See Information Center Verbund NATIONAL PARK HOHE TAUERN LEOGANG Experience World Wood – Mining and Gothic Museum Mühlauersäge Minerals Crystal Cellar Toboggan Run Kohlschnait Flying Fox XXL Adventure Mountain Naglköpfl Tobogganing on the Asitz Noriker Horse Museum Weissee Glacier World PONGAU National Park Worlds Mittersill Adventure Castle Klammstein Museum Bramberg Alpentherme Toboggan Run Wildkogel Felsentherme Sixty Minutes – Escape Room Krimml Waterfalls SALZBURG CITY National Park House Haus der Natur ‘Könige der Lüfte’ Mönchsberg lift Museum der Moderne – MAISHOFEN Mönchsberg Kreativland Museum der Moderne – Rupertinum SAALBACH-HINTERGLEMM Fortress Hohensalzburg Skicircus Saalbach Hinterglemm Mozart Birthplace Leogang Fieberbrunn Mozart Residence Snowmobil*City Treetop Path and SALZBURG SURROUNDINGS Golden Gate Bridge Salzburg Open-Air Museum Salzburg Zoo Hellbrunn SAALFELDEN Salt Mine Berchtesgaden Toboggan Run Biberg Museum Castle Ritzen LUNGAU Climbing Gym Felsenfest Castle Adventure Mauterndorf SAALACH VALLEY TYROL Lamprechts Cave Adventure Fortress Kufstein Silver Mine Schwaz Swarovski
    [Show full text]
  • Common Cause Failures, Particular Risks and Zonal Safety Analysis
    SYSTEM SAFETY ASSESSMENT COURSE 9th May 2012 COMMON CAUSE FAILURES, PARTICULAR RISKS AND ZONAL SAFETY ANALYSIS R.G.W. Cherry & Associates Limited 2012. All rights reserved - 1 - SYSTEM SAFETY ASSESSMENT COURSE 9th May 2012 1 Common Cause Failures Common Cause Failures are often the limiting factor on the integrity of complex systems, and yet they are often overlooked in the safety assessment process. In this module consideration is given to the various forms of Common Cause Failures that have the potential for compromising the reliability of aircraft systems and the possible methods for identifying them during the design process. 1.1 THEORY V PRACTICE It is normally expected that if the probability of failure of one channel in a given period is X and there are N channels, any of which may achieve the intended function, then the probability of all channels failing is: XN …………………. Equation 1 The impact of Common Cause Failures on an aircraft electrical power generation system was assessed from a study carried out by Hawker Siddeley Aviation in the 1970s. The study was carried out on an in-service aircraft that had three otherwise independent electrical power generation channels. For this aircraft, the average failure rate for each of the channels was found to be approximately: 9.5 x 10 -4 per flight Now if the aircraft had only two electrical power generation channels then the probability of both failing due to independent causes might be expected to be :- (9.5 x 10 -4)2 per flight = 9 x 10 -7 per flight (approx.) And for the three-channel system: (9.5 x 10 -4)3 per flight = 8.6 x 10 -10 per flight (approx.) However, when the in-service record for the subject aircraft was investigated it was found that multi-channel failures occurred at a much greater frequency than predicted by this simple theoretical approach.
    [Show full text]