Hang Gliding & Paragliding Association of Canada
Association Canadienne de Vol Libre
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups 
 ProfileProfile   Forum SubscriptionsForum Subscriptions   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Free Flight Risk Management Updated Feb 16th 2011

Post new topic   Reply to topic    HPAC/ACVL Forum Index -> Members Only
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Fred Wilson
Joined: 10 Dec 2014
Posts: 45
PostPosted: Fri Dec 31, 2010 03:26 pm    Post subject: Free Flight Risk Management Updated Feb 16th 2011 Reply with quote

See Oz Report thread on Free Flight Risk Management Updated Feb 16th 2011
Part A: on personal risk management (derived mostly from preventable accident scenarios that have the potential to impact our PR stance, not to mention our insurance program, negatively.)

Part B: on Risk Management issues possibly facing our National Associations, Clubs and Schools:

Proposing a "Risk Management Policy and Procedures" PRD sub-heading under that of Insurance:
This aimed at reducing the likelyhood of PR issues and preventable claims against our insurance policy which is our associations biggest, best and most important product. Well worth preventative measures to protect. Much better than (over) reactive, slapped together, corporate policy intrusions that we have seen foreign equivalents of Transport Canada force on other associations notably the HGFA, NZHGPA, BHPA and DHV, all in a panic to comply. Not, not the way to go.

Arlo Speer Chief, Recreational Aviation & Special Flight Operations Transport Canada wrote:
“Hang gliders are included within the group of gliders." Canadian Aviation Regulations (CAR 101.01 defines "hang glider": as "a glider that is designed to carry not more than two persons and has a launch weight of 45 kg (99.2 pounds) or less. (aile libre)".

Therefore, without specific reference to the contrary, any exclusion which applies to gliders must apply to hang gliders as well as all other kinds of gliders.”

RA&SF Operations Transport Canada at later date(s) wrote:
"We are not going to make one regulation for Cessna's and one for DeHaviland. So regulations for gliding are regulations for hang gliding unless specific exclusions so stated apply. Where Specific Canadian Aviation Regulations and Standards are required for Hang Gliding, Paragliding and / or AeroTowing they will be published in CARs.

If certain Gliding CARs are obviously irrelevant they can obviously be ignored. Where there are Grey areas use your best judgment. Any question(s)? Best to take the safer course of action and / or obtain assistance from your Recreational Aviation Specialist at Transport Canada's Civil Aviation Branch and / or The Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB)."

This level of bureaucracy is not unique to Canada:
See: FFVL France; and DHV Germany; the HGFA Australia and its HGFA Operations Manual; the NZHGPA New Zealand; and the BHPA UK.

Ian Jarman, Past Executive Officer HGFA Australia wrote in 1995: wrote:

"International standardisation should be a CIVL/FAI goal.
Reinventing something that already exists to an acceptable standard is a waste of our already scant time and manpower resources."

Ian Jarman, administrateur australien de la HGFA écrit: wrote:

"La standardisation internationale devrait être un des buts de la CIVL/FAI.
Réinventer quelque chose qui existe déjà à un niveau acceptable est une perte de notre temps et de nos ressources humaines."

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fred Wilson
Joined: 10 Dec 2014
Posts: 45
PostPosted: Fri Dec 31, 2010 03:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

One, specifically Canadian, thought though:

A review HAGAR support, promotion and “enforcement” might be appropriate. See:
a) Flight Crew Licensing: http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/standards/general-personnel-menu-2287.htm
- assuring that HPAC member's HAGAR licenses are current / valid. This requires renewal of the Medical Cat 5 Declaration (or higher level versions as required.)
b) How to Stay Current: http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/standards/general-personnel-current-2281.htm

Medical Requirements in CARs: http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/regserv/cars/part4-subpart4-1083.htm
Medical Requirements (Standards) http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/regserv/cars/part4-standards-standard424-174.htm

(I wonder about HPAC accountability (bad PR) re
a) posting that someone has their HAGAR when it has in fact expired until they renew their medical; or
b) the consequences of a near miss or mid air where the pilot does not have their HAGAR.)

As would be Safety Management Systems reference also this CAR's, the Transport Canada's SMS Standards and their SMS FAQ's. Finally see: Safety Management Systems Directives

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gerry Grossnegger
Joined: 10 Dec 2014
Posts: 1
PostPosted: Sat Jan 01, 2011 04:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

We're actually just saying that that's their HAGAR number, not that their HAGAR rating is current.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fred Wilson
Joined: 10 Dec 2014
Posts: 45
PostPosted: Wed Jan 19, 2011 09:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ahhh... Light bulb. Tnx Gerry!

Still, it is not going to excuse us what so ever if we get caught with our pants down, is it? (re: Non HAGAR near miss incidents or worse, etc.)

IMHO none of our national volunteers gets into it, wanting to become our version of Tricky Dicky Nixon, and get expelled from office via embarrassing themselves out of business by not having provided the necessary leadership prior to crisis. That is what administrative Risk Management is. Thinking ahead and taking proactive measures, rather than hasty, reactive / over responses to provide a sham veil of professionalism, which, IMHO we are seeing in NZ, Oz, Britain and even Germany after they all got slapped hard by their versions of Transport Canada, Coroners...

Way better to provide the prerequisite leadership. IMHO. Nobody said the HPAC jobs would be easy. Nobody in their right mind would want to tackle these sorts of things, (Risk Management etc.) but unquestionably it is the right thing to do if we want to keep (and thinking long term about) complete control over our own sport and issues.

We have one of THE experts in the field in Risk Management chairing our Insurance Committee. FYI he was at one time in the not so distant past employed in Risk Management by the Government of British Columbia HQ! Shocked I suspect every other national organization planet wide is jealous of us and our present policy. We will soon lose him as he has made it crystal clear that he wants to retire and move on.
(He owns and operates a very very busy insurance adjusting / Risk Management Consulting Company in Victoria.) We would be flat out nuts to not take advantage of his skills and expertise while we can to overhaul our "administrative" level risks. (Policies and Procedures, operating issues and standards...) Well worth paying real money for real work. IMHO. Period.

Give him a heads up to mull over the subject area. No rush on our part. He could schedule it into a normally slack time of year for him (if such ever exits in that madhouse specialty field.) It would be, IMHO, cruel and unusual abuse and punishment to expect him to do this level of work on volunteer time. Pay the guy the big bucks the big job demands. Well worth every penny in the long term. No question.

Again, my belief is we are best to maximize Recommended Standards where ever practicable, in preference to "Regulations" we may or can not enforce or support.
- our leaders appears to be well aware of this: as a goodly number of HPAC PRD's, 10 years into the process, have still not been written. Noting several gaps which are not even listed yet, current example here being a Risk Management PRD 445.0 subheading under Insurance.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fred Wilson
Joined: 10 Dec 2014
Posts: 45
PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 05:34 am    Post subject: Landowner Contact Information Reply with quote

Landowner (etc.) Contact Information Files.

Landowners who have given us (a minumum verbal) permission to land and / or take off from their property immediately obtain expanded third person coverage from our HPAC Insurance Policy. Maintaining a club list of landowers is important so that we are assured of keeping current information on them for this (and other valuable) purpose(s). A more formal form is posted HERE where written permission is desirable or obtainable.

Example, see: http://www.flyok.ca/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=401
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fred Wilson
Joined: 10 Dec 2014
Posts: 45
PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 10:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Re: Our Insurance Committee Chairperson has made it crystal clear that he wants to retire and move on.

One item we need and could really use in our HPAC database is what our members skills and expertise area is. Then when
a) specialists in the field retire, we have a better chance of lobbying someone to replace them.
b) we need specialists, in our membership, in a specific field area for short term projects, we would know where to turn.

Not publicly viewable of course, but something the Administrator level people could quickly search for and find.

Having the right people in the right specialty field at the right time vastly reduces our "risks" and enhances our effectiveness, services and overall reputation.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fred Wilson
Joined: 10 Dec 2014
Posts: 45
PostPosted: Wed Jan 26, 2011 06:01 pm    Post subject: Risk Management Course Video Lectures Reply with quote

Risk Management Course Video Lectures: Developing modern course material

John Matylonek wrote:
The Risk Management Course at OHGS Online has been extensively updated with professionally produced video lectures from Toronto-based veteran hang gliding instructor, Michael Robertson, inventor of the Robertson Charts of Reliability (RBR) risk management system. Included are articles on the physiology of error by advanced instructor John Matylonek of Oregon Hang Gliding School; analysis of the probability of error by Mike Meier of Wills Wing, Inc; USHPA professionally produced preflight videos narrated by Paul Voight of Fly High Hang Gliding and club-based preflight and checklist systems, a video on paragliding accident analysis. A comprehensive quiz follows the material allowing life long learner rated pilots to test themselves and to assist USHPA certified instructors in testing their students in these vital topics.

Choose the "login as guest" button and when asked for a password type "guest" no quotes at Http://www.oregonhanggliding.com/tutorials

This risk management course will modularize with the expansion of material and be closely related to the Meteorology course as both develop.

Discuss "Risk Management Course Video Lectures" at the Oz Report forum.

Safety Management Systems (SMS) most likely apply to our schools.
For our Clubs and Associations it is likely one of those "grey areas" we are well advised to adopt in case the chop should happen some day and we have to.

What is out here is information overload. No one has PHD level staff willing or able to take this on.

My experience is that there is a reluctance within any organizations throughout Canada (flying or non flying)
to commit anything in writing on a voluntary basis that can be construed as a legal liability.
Voluntary application of SMS is likely contrary to any legal advice that organizations etc might obtain.
Businesses and government organizations have legal responsibilities.
SMS may be viewed differently in terms of liability, certainly for organizations mandated under legislation to apply SMS.

Bottom line, this is overwhelming.
I have asked BCIT OCHS Distance Education to look into preparing a course based on this material. They promise to reply shortly.

1. CARS Part 1 Subpart 7

2. Safety Management Systems (SMS) FAQs

3. Guidance Material

. . . a) Safety Management Systems Development Guide for Small Operators/Organizations
-" The “Minimal Complexity — One-Person Operation” column of Appendix A is based on a one-person businesses.
Score 3 element criteria (Appendix B of SI SUR-001) are used as the basis for this component
- "The “Moderate Complexity” column is based on a five- to ten-person... Score 3 element criteria (Appendix B of SI SUR-001)
are used as the basis for this component, and are identified by a hollow square bullet in the attached Appendix A.
Organizations may incorporate additional expectations as identified in Appendix B of SI SUR-001,
where such expectations are considered to be relevant to the complexity of the organization’s systems.
Examples of additional expectation from SI SUR-001 Appendix B are identified by arrow-shaped bullets in the attached Appendix A.

. . . b) TP 14135 - Safety Management Systems for Small Aviation Operations - A Practical Guide to Implementation

4. Notices of Proposed Amendment (NPA) on the Safety Management System (SMS)

5. Safety Management System Technical Program Evaluation and Co-ordination

6. Safety Management System Directive No 31

7. Safety Management Systems Implementation Plan

8. NAV CANADA article on Safety Management Systems (illegal charter in their url - should be forward slashes.) - Copy all and paste.
- http://www.navcanada.ca/NavCanada.asp?Language=EN&Content=ContentDefinitionFiles\Newsroom\backgrounders\Safety.xml

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fred Wilson
Joined: 10 Dec 2014
Posts: 45
PostPosted: Fri Feb 11, 2011 10:17 am    Post subject: [b]Airspace Risk Management[/b] Reply with quote

Airspace Risk Management

1. See Part 2 at: http://www.flyok.ca/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=546

2. Hang Glider Activity.
FIC is used to pilots phoning saying they are flying from Airport A to Airport B.

Our pilots phone in their (HAGAR) Flight Itinerary saying things like "I am flying from Deadman's to King Eddie" which leaves them at a complete loss.

FIC Kamloops (Air Traffic Control for British Columbia Canada) established the following initiative for our MAJOR sites to provide the minimum reference information for their employees:

a) Hang Glider & Paraglider Activity: North Okanagan Region
b) Hang Glider & Paraglider Activity South Okanagan Region
c) Hang Glider & Paraglider Activity: Kamloops / Thompson Region

d) Hang Glider & Paraglider Activity: Kootenays Region
e) Hang Glider Activity. Rocky Mt and East Kootenays Region

Feel Free to use these as a Template for your region.

Similar documents for NE and NW BC are under development.

3. It appears that adding our most frequently used and important sites to the Canada Flight Supplement is the way to go.
a) Placing Soaring Symbols on VFR charts are impractical we are told.
- IFR pilots rarely have them or refer to them, and the GPS information is so cluttered, items like this are turned off.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    HPAC/ACVL Forum Index -> Members Only All times are GMT-6 hours: CST/MDT
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group