Transport Canada announced today that they will require terrain awareness and warning systems (TAWS) to be installed in all private turbine-powered and commercial airplanes with six or more passenger seats.
The Honourable Denis Lebel, Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, today announced new regulations to improve aviation safety in Canada. The new regulations require private turbine-powered and commercial airplanes with six or more passenger seats to be equipped with an alert system known as the “terrain awareness and warning system” (TAWS).
"While Canada has one of the safest aviation systems in the world, we are committed to the continuous improvement of aviation safety," said Minister Lebel. “Terrain awareness and warning systems will help save lives."
The system provides acoustic and visual alerts to flight crews when the path of their aircraft is likely to collide with terrain, water or obstacles — a situation that can happen when visibility is low or the weather is poor. This gives the flight crew enough time to take evasive action.
The new regulations will also significantly increase safety for small aircraft, which fly into remote wilderness or mountainous areas where the danger of flying into terrain is highest.
Under the new regulations, operators will have two years to equip their airplanes with TAWS.
The regulations comply with the International Civil Aviation Organization’s standards and bring Canadian regulations closer to those of other aviation authorities, including the United States and European Union. Canada’s Transportation Safety Board also recommends the wider use of TAWS to help pilots assess their proximity to terrain.
3 comments:
I thought commercial had TAWS already? I guess it's a good idea, but I would like to see the stats that says private turboprops and turbojets have been crashing a lot because they lacked it. Is this a solution in search of a problem? Is this the best solution to controlled flight into terrain, or would smarter practices and training not be better? Seems like a crutch that may not even work that well if pilots are so bad that they plan flights into mountains or descend below MDAs and DAs?
Personally I would like to see the cost-benefit study on this. How many accidents could have been prevented? How much will fleet equipage cost? How does this make sense?
Of course every new rule like this costs more money and forces more people out of flying, which will actually reduce accidents. They should try this approach with automobile accidents.
Post a Comment