Home » ASN News
EASA issues safety recommendations for the transport of Portable Electronic Devices containing lithium batteries
5 April 2017

EASA issues safety recommendations for the transport of Portable Electronic Devices containing lithium batteries

EASA issued safety recommendations for the transport of Portable Electronic Devices containing lithium batteries, in the wake of the U.S. and U.K. ban on equipment like laptops to be carried in the passenger cabin on flights from certain countries.

The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) issued a Safety Information Bulletin to remind airlines and aircraft operators of important principles for the safe transport of Portable Electronic Devices (PEDs) containing lithium batteries. These principles should be taken into account by the airlines when they perform their safety risk assessment.

PEDs containing lithium batteries are considered as dangerous goods. When carried by passengers, they should preferably be carried in the passenger cabin. This would enable the crew to react quickly in case an incident involving such PED occurs.

When the carriage of PEDs in the cabin is not allowed, it leads to a significant increase of the number of PEDs in the cargo compartment. Certain precautions should therefore be observed to mitigate the risk of accidental fire in the cargo hold. In particular, PEDs placed in checked baggage must be completely switched off and well protected from accidental activation.

More information:

 

FAA extends flight prohibition for Libyan airspace

The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) issued a new Notam, extending the flight prohibition for certain U.S. aircraft for the Libyan airspace by another two years.

Transport Canada bans drone use near airports

Transport Canada introduced a measure to prevent the reckless use of drones in Canada, banning the use within 9 km of any airport.

TC states that the number of incidents involving recreational drones has more than tripled since 2014, prompting the Minister of Transport to introduce an immediate measure which will affect the operations of model aircraft and recreational drones of more than 250 g and up to 35 kg.

The key new rules are that recreational drone operators must mark their drone with their contact information, and may not fly:

  • higher than 90 metres;
  • at night;
  • within 75 metres of buildings, vehicles or people; or
  • within 9 kilometres of the centre of any airport, heliport, aerodrome or water aerodrome where aircraft take off and land.

Operators of drones for commercial, academic or research purposes are not affected by this measure. The rules that are already in place are effective and most commercial users operate their drones in a safe manner, according to Transport Canada.

Any recreational operator who fails to comply with the new flying restrictions and conditions could be subject to fines of up to $3,000.

More information:

FAA extends conflict zone Notams on Pakistan, Syrian airspace by a year

The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration extended the Conflict Zone Notam on Pakistani and Syrian airspace by a year. U.S. pilots are warned about the risks when flying into and out of Pakistan for the potential threat of terrorists using manpads.  For Syria it remains prohibited to conduct flight operations in the Damascus (OSTT) FIR by all U.S. air carriers.

More information

 

FAA extends conflict zone Notam on Afghan airspace by a year

The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration extended the Conflict Zone Notam on Afghan airspace by a year, warning American pilots to stay at or above FL330 over Afghanistan.

 

Transport Canada sued in law suit over Air Canada A320 crash

Air Canada 624 as it came to rest (TSB)

Air Canada 624 as it came to rest (TSB)

The Canadian aviation regulator, Transport Canada, is one of the parties being sued in a class action law suit over the accident of Air Canada flight 624 at Halifax in 2015.

The accident occurred when the Airbus A320 hit powerlines and an antenna array as it attempted to land at Halifax International Airport, Canada during a period of snow fall and limited visibility. The aircraft was conducting a Localizer (LOC-Z) approach to runway 05 at the time. Twenty-three occupants were injured.

The lawsuit alleges that Transport Canada breached its duty of care by inadequately monitoring the airport’s compliance with safety requirements and by choosing not to install an ILS for runway 05.

Federal lawyers challenged Transport Canada’s responsibility in court, arguing that the regulator could not be sued because it did not owe a duty of care to the passengers. Nova Scotia Supreme Court Justice Denise Boudreau decided that even though Transport Canada did not owe a duty of care to the flying public, it had to be included in the lawsuit because as landlord for the airport, it could be held responsible for its navigation systems and other equipment.
Other defendants in the case include Air Canada, the Halifax International Airport Authority, NavCanada and Airbus.

More information:

EASA proposes drug, alcohol testing and psychological assessment of pilots

The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) published a proposal to the European Commission on new operational rules on pilot mental fitness, drug and alcohol testing. This proposal is part of an action plan following the Germanwings Flight 9525 accident.
EASA’s proposal, Opinion 14/2016, includes the following new requirements:

  • Ensuring that all pilots have access to a support programme;
  • Mandating airlines to perform a psychological assessment of pilots before the start of employment;
  • Introducing systematic Drug & Alcohol (D&A) testing of flight and cabin crew upon employment, after a serious incident or accident, with due cause (i.e. following reasonable suspicion), as well as
  • Unannounced D&A testing after rehabilitation and return to work;
  • As an additional safety barrier for airlines which are not already subject to a national programme for psychoactive substance testing: mandatory random alcohol screening of flight and cabin crew within the EU RAMP inspection programme.

The proposals address relevant safety recommendations made after the Flight 9525 accident by the EASA-led Task Force, as well as by the French Bureau d’Enquêtes et d’Analyses (BEA).

The EASA Opinion will serve as the basis for a legislative proposal by the European Commission in the course of 2017.

 

FAA extends flight ban for Ukraine’s Simferopol and Dnipropetrovsk FIRs

Simferopol (UKFV) and Dnipropetrovsk (UKDV) FIRs

Simferopol (UKFV) and Dnipropetrovsk (UKDV) FIRs

Due to the continuing hazards the the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is extending the prohibition on flight operations in the Simferopol (UKFV) and Dnipropetrovsk (UKDV) FIRs in Ukraine.

The FAA initially banned all U.S. flights from the Simferopol and Dnipropetrovsk areas on July 18, 2014, the day after Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 was shot down near Hrabove, Ukraine. The FAA continued to evaluate the situation in the area and has determined there is a continuing significant flight safety hazard to U.S. civil aviation.

Simferopol FIR

Although the European Aviation Safety Agency’s (EASA) published a Safety Information Bulletin (SIB) on February 17, 2016, indicating that ATS routes L851 and M856 could be considered for planning flights in the Simferopol (UKFV) FIR, there is continuing concern over the hazard to U.S. civil aviation from possible conflicting air traffic control instructions from Ukrainian and Russian air traffic service providers. Shortly following the EASA bulletin, the Russian Federal Air Transport Agency responded with a press release in which it again asserted that it was responsible for air traffic services in a portion of the Simferopol (UKFV) FIR. The Russian circular (from Feb 21, 2016) further stated, “The Russian Federation does not bear the responsibility for the provision of safety to those flights, which will be operated within Simferopol FIR under control of ATC unit other than Simferopol Air Traffic Management Centre.” Russia contended that EASA’s decision was politically motivated and `pose[d] a threat to aviation safety in the region.’ In addition, there have been reported incidents of purposeful interference, including GPS jamming, in the Simferopol (UKFV) and Dnipropetrovsk (UKDV) FIRs. Based on this information, the FAA continues to assess that there is a significant flight safety hazard to U.S. civil aviation in the Simferopol (UKFV) FIR.

Dnipropetrovsk FIR

In the Dnipropetrovsk (UKDV) FIR, there is an ongoing risk of skirmishes in the area and a potential for larger-scale fighting in eastern Ukraine involving combined Russian-separatist forces, according to the FAA. This could result in civil aircraft being misidentified as a threat and then intercepted or otherwise engaged, as demonstrated by the shoot down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17. These combined forces have access to a variety of anti-aircraft weapons, to include man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS) and possibly more advanced surface-to-air-missiles (SAMs) that have the capability to engage aircraft at higher altitudes.
Separatists have demonstrated their ability to use these anti-aircraft weapons by successfully shooting down a number of aircraft during the course of the fighting in eastern Ukraine in 2014. More recently, Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine (SMM) unmanned aerial systems (UASs) also have been shot down by surface-to-air missiles and small arms ground fire, and brought down with GPS jamming in the Dnipropetrovsk (UKDV) FIR.

These considerations caused the FAA to extend the flight ban from October 27, 2016, to October 27, 2018.

More info:

U.S. bans all Samsung Galaxy Note7 phones from airplanes

Warning notice on Note7 devices before ban was issued (photo: mike / CC:by-sa)

Warning notice on Note7 devices before ban was issued (photo: mike / CC:by-sa)

U.S. authorities have banned  all Samsung Galaxy Note7 smartphone devices from aircraft over safety issues.

The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), issued an emergency order to ban all Samsung Galaxy Note7 smartphone devices from air transportation in the United States.
Individuals who own or possess a Samsung Galaxy Note7 device may not transport the device on their person, in carry-on baggage, or in checked baggage on flights to, from, or within the United States. This prohibition includes all Samsung Galaxy Note7 devices. The phones also cannot be shipped as air cargo.  The ban will be effective on Saturday, October 15, 2016, at noon ET.

The order explains that a Samsung Galaxy Note 7 device “may cause an ignition or a dangerous evolution of heat or become a fuel source for fire.” Samsung acknowledged this fact with the September 15, 2016 recall, Samsung’s October 11, 2016 announcement that it was suspending the manufacture and sale of the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 device, and the October 13, 2016 Samsung expanded recall covering all Samsung Galaxy Note 7 devices. Furthermore, persons have experienced incidents of dangerous evolution of heat with the recalled Samsung Galaxy Note 7 device, also on aircraft.

More information:

 

FAA issues airline guidance on recalled devices powered by lithium batteries

Following a Consumer Product Safety Commission recall of the Samsung Galaxy Note 7, the U.S. FAA issued general guidance to airlines about the rules for carrying recalled or defective lithium devices on board aircraft as cargo or in carry-on luggage.

U.S. hazardous material regulations prohibit air cargo shipments of recalled or defective lithium batteries and lithium battery-powered devices, and passengers may not turn on or charge the devices when they carry them on board a plane. Passengers must also protect the devices from accidental activation, including disabling any features that may turn on the device, such as alarm clocks, and must not pack them in checked luggage.

The SAFO urges the airlines: to ensure that cargo and passenger processing employees, and those responsible for cabin safety, are aware of the rules; to ensure that cargo customers are aware of the rules; and to include information and guidance on their websites about damaged or recalled lithium batteries and devices.

The SAFO notes that the hazardous material regulations do not preclude an airline from proactively placing its own restrictions on carrying or using specific lithium battery products on board aircraft, prior to an official government recall or advisory.