曝光臺 注意防騙 網曝天貓店富美金盛家居專營店坑蒙拐騙欺詐消費者

However, some problems remain that SESAR could not solve. In the definition phase, clarity could not be reached in regard to two central points: consensus on one 'Common Technical Vision' that describes the avionics standards with which airspace users must be equipped, and how the probably negative cost/ben¬efit ratio for GA can be overcome. IA0PA is looking forward to continued dialogue with all groups involved in the SESAR Joint Undertaking.
As the representative of GA activities, IA0PA in its contribution to the Interna¬tional Civil Aviation 0rganization (ICA0) Top Safety Items in 0ctober 2008,
proposed a series of solutions. 0ne of the most significant proposals was to improve levels of safety through better educa¬tion and training. But to do this, more accurate and detailed accident/incident data and analysis should be gathered and made available to GA.
It further proposed that terminal airspace designers consider the effects on GA VFR operations. Furthermore, guidance should be given to promote safe standards for VFR flights and that proper airspace classification and ATM procedures are guaranteed. Aviation
safety-related information and operational services associated with weather brief¬ings, aeronautical information, flight plan handling and en-route communications should be provided at no — or low — cost to encourage safe operations for GA traffic, especially while flying VFR. IA0PA
is also concerned that airport traffic-sep¬aration standards should be emphasised to ensure adequate separation between large and small aircraft.
Moreover, pilots/owners may become less proficient as costs increase and they can no longer afford to fl y as often as be¬fore. The impact this may have on safety should be borne in mind. Finally, research should be continued into the significant hazard of runway incursions. Appropriate SARPS (ICA0 Standards and Recommend¬ed Practices) should be promulgated and aviation safety guidance material for GA operations should be made more readily available worldwide.
 
EBAA safety perspective
Jeff Apter and Eric Mandemaker, Chief Executive 0ffi cer of the European Business Aircraft Association assess the safety record for business aircraft and examine the efforts being made to improve it
 
Safety in aviation is undeni¬ably priority number one. However, despite huge and continuing efforts across all sectors, we still suffer accidents and incidents, including fatalities. But it is im¬portant when we talk about aviation safety that we are careful to put 'the numbers' into perspective. Assigning statistics is not altogether an easy task and while aviation has always had a strong desire to use facts and available data to learn from its failings, it is important that in doing so we take care to ensure that we compare apples with apples. Reliable statistics are a must; they need to tell an accurate story from which key information can be deduced.
With the vast number of different types of flying machines in the air, it is not surprising that it is difficult to compile, analyse and subsequently compare data. Accident data on airliners is accurate and robust, which of course has everything to
do with the fact that when a large passen¬ger jet has an accident, it is normally well publicised. The same can be said with regard to business aircraft — both jet and
turboprops — where quite accurate data is available and manufacturers typically assist in accident investigations
Based on the data from Flight Insight's 2008 report looking at fleet size, we can determine the following with regard to the total number of aircraft flying within either the airline or Business Aviation group. (See Table one)
This simple tabulation demonstrates that the fleet of business aircraft is almost as large as all the operational jet airliners in the world. Now one might expect that Business Aviation is as safe as the airlines considering that the training and crew requirements
　
中國航空網 www.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：EUROCONTROL EBAA IAOPA Yearbook 2009: The Business of Flying(35)