1. Aviation Safety Challenges
and Opportunities for COSCAP Regional Safety Teams
A Manufacturer’s Perspective
Hank Reed
Aviation Safety
The Boeing Company
Gerard Guyot
Safety Consultant
Airbus

2. Aviation Safety: Some Perspective
Worldwide:
An airplane is landing approximately every two seconds somewhere in the world
Approximately 53,000 flights per day
More than 3 million people fly each day
In 2006, Over 1.2 billion people flew on over 20 million flights
In 2006, there was 7 fatal accidents
With that introduction, let me begin. Discussions of safety tend to emphasize our failures as an industry – the accidents and serious incidents that we are trying to eliminate. We will talk about those, but first, I want to start off with the good news. We operate in an extremely safe industry, so we should first celebrate our success before we talk about our shortcomings.
Every two seconds of every day of the year, an airplane is landing somewhere in the world – about 45,000 flights per day carrying approximately 3 million people every day. In 2002, over 1.2 billion people flew on over 16 and a half million flights. In 2002, the industry experienced 9 fatal large jet accidents that resulted in 702 fatalities worldwide. Of those 702 fatalities, 122 occurred to airlines from the North Asia COSCAP States. Although the number of fatal accidents in 2002 was below average, we did as an industry suffer a larger than average number of fatalities.
Fortunately, 2003 through has been as kinder to our industry. To date, we have suffered only five fatal accidents resulting in the loss of 338 people. None of these accidents involved airlines from the COSCAP North Asia
Tragic as these losses are, we still must remember that we operate in an extremely safe system.

3. Airline Travel is Extraordinarily Safe
42,643
U.S. Transportation Fatalities – 2003*
Source: NTSB
Number of
Fatalities
703
767
622
626 73 47
Highway
Recreational
boating
and other
marine
Rail
transportation
Bicycles
General
aviation
Commercial
Airlines*
Other
commercial
aviation
*5-Year (ending in 2003) average for commercial Jets, U.S. operations only
PUB-015

4. … And we are making progress!
Hull Loss Accident Rate
Western-Built Worldwide Commercial Jets (>60,000 lbs)
2.00
5 year running average
Hull Loss Accident Rate
(per million departures)
1.60
1.20
0.80
Have we been improving? Have the efforts we have all expended over the last decade been fruitful?
This chart takes a closer look at the worldwide hull loss accident rate over the last 11 years – it clearly shows that we have made improvements in both the absolute hull loss accident rate as well as with the 5-year moving average.
Clearly, we are making progress!
With that background, let us address our challenge with a few more facts and data.
0.40
Industry/Government Collaborative Efforts
0.00
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006

5. We Need to Continuously Improve Aviation Safety…50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10
Annual Hull loss accident rate
[Accidents per million departures] 5
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
2020
FT-004Wc

6. We Need to Continuously Improve Aviation Safety…50
32,495 45
Airplanes in service
20,042 40 35
2006
2021 30 25 20
Departures, Millions 15 10
Annual Hull loss accident rate
[Accidents per million departures] 5
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
2020
FT-004Wc

7. We Need to Continuously Improve Aviation Safety…50
32,495 45
Airplanes in service
20,042 40 35
2006
2021 30
Hull loss accidents per year
Business as usual 25 20 15
Departures per year,
Millions 10
Reductions possible with
continued Industry effort
Annual Hull loss accident rate
[Accidents per million departures] 5
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
2020
FT-004Wc

8. Departures and Flight Hours Worldwide Operations* 1987 through 200645
40.3 40
Flight hours
Departures 35
Annual departures and
flight hours (millions) 30 25 20
20.0 15 10 5 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06
Year
487.5 million cumulative departures since 1959 (396.1 million on Boeing airplanes)
874.4 million cumulative flight hours since 1959 (684.9 million on Boeing airplanes)
7 manufacturers – 35 significant types (14 Boeing) in service as of 12/31/2006
*Western fleet

9. Worldwide Commercial Jet Fleet is Growing, But There are Limits to Growth
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
2005
2010
2020
Number of
airplanes at
years end
2002
32,000
30000
GROWTH
Public Confidence
Strong Economies
Peace & Prosperity
LIMITS TO GROWTH
2015
Safety/Security Perceptions
Traffic Congestion
Environmental Factors
We have to understand that for growth to continue, many factors are important. In our business, public confidence in the safety of our system is the single most important factor that we can strive to improve. Our system, though, is limited by the safety and security perceptions of our citizens – our potential customers.
An accident undermines those perceptions. The front page articles describing the latest accident undermines those perceptions.
Thus, we must as an industry strive to continue to improve. We have no way of addressing those perceptions of safety except by actions on our part.

10. Because the Aviation System Is Complex, All Parts of Industry Must Work Together
150,000+ flight crew
200+ languages
800+ airlines
200+ countries
1,350+ major airports
The aviation system is an extremely complex system. This chart illustrates some of that complexity –
800+ airlines operating around the globe into over 1350 major airports. Over 21,000 airplanes being flown by over 150,000 flight crew and maintained by over 240,000 maintenance personnel. Over 200 countries speaking over 200 languages ….
And with all of this complexity, we have to figure out a way to work together to improve safety
More than 21,000
airplanes
240,000+ maintenance
personnel

11. Safety Responsibilities Are Shared Safe Airplane + Safe Operation + Safe Infrastructure = Safe Air Travel
Air Safety
Aviation law
Operations specification
Rules and regulations
Inspectors policy, procedures, and training
Airline policy and procedures requirements
Safety, health, environmental law, and regulations
Navigation facilities/operations
Airport facilities
Departure en route, arrival, approach policy, and procedures
Air traffic control services
Safety-related analysis
Governments
Manufacturers
Safe airplane design
Safety-enhancing technology development
Flight and maintenance operations, recommendations, documents, training, and support
Maintenance planning
Safety-related analysis
Safety initiatives
Operators
The three-legged stool chart demonstrates how we each have our responsibilities that are necessary to support our overall Air Safety challenge.
We as manufacturers need to supply our operators with safe airplanes and the resources and support necessary to operate them in a safe and efficient manner.
It’s the operator’s responsibility to operate and maintain those airplanes.
Operations policy and procedures
Airplane/pilot publications
Approved maintenance program
Maintenance, policy, and procedures
Maintenance publications
Safety program
Training

12. Fatalities by CAST/ICAO Taxonomy Accident Category
Fatal Accidents – Worldwide Commercial Jet Fleet – 1997 Through 2006
1800
1643 (67)
ARC Abnormal Runway Contact
CFIT Controlled Flight into or Toward Terrain
F-NI Fire/Smoke (Non-Impact)
FUEL Fuel Related
LOC-G Loss of Control – Ground
LOC-I Loss of Control – In flight
MAC Midair/Near Midair Collision
OTHR Other
RAMP Ground Handling
RE Runway Excursion
RI-VAP Runway Incursion – Vehicle, Aircraft or Person
SCF-NP System/Component Failure or Malfunction (Non-Powerplant)
SCF-PP System/Component Failure or Malfunction (Powerplant)
TURB Turbulence Encounter
USOS Undershoot/Overshoot
UNK Unknown or Undetermined
WSTRW Wind shear or Thunderstorm
No accidents were noted in the following categories:
AMAN Abrupt Maneuver
ADRM Aerodrome
ATM Air Traffic Management/ Communications, Navigation, Surveillance
CABIN Cabin Safety Events
EVAC Evacuation
F-POST Fire/Smoke (Post-Impact)
GCOL Ground Collision
ICE Icing
LALT Low Altitude Operations
RI-A Runway Incursion – Animal
SEC Security Related
For a complete description go to:
1655 (0)
External fatalities [Total 249]
Onboard fatalities [Total 5,149]
1600
1400
1200
Fatalities
1000
800
600
546 (0)
Onboard fatalities
External fatalities
400
262 (77)
156 (71)
200
126 (0)
124 (2)
120 (0)
110 (10)
110 (4)
109 (1)
107 (1)
55 (9)
23 (0)
0 (7)
2 (0)
1 (0)
LOC-I
CFIT
SCF- RE
MAC
LOC-G
OTHR
UNK
RI-VAP
F-NI
USOS
WSTRW
ARC
FUEL
RAMP
SCF-
TURB
Number of fatal accidents (89 total) NP PP 19 20 5 8 2 1 5 2 3 2 3 2 6 1 7 2 1
Note: Principal categories as assigned by CAST.

13. Fatal Accidents and Onboard Fatalities by Phase of Flight
Worldwide Commercial Jet Fleet – 1997 Through 2006
Percentage of accidents/fatalities
Taxi, load/
unload parked, tow
19%
32%
Initial
Climb
Initial
Final
Takeoff
climb
(flaps up)
Cruise
Descent
approach
approach
Landing
Fatal Accidents
13%
11% 8%
11%
10% 5%
10%
10%
22%
Onboard Fatalities 0%
12%
17%
12% Q
19% 6%
14%
15% 5%
29%
20%
Initial approach fix
Final approach fix
Exposure* (Percentage of flight time estimated for a
1.5 hour flight)
<1% 1% 1%
14%
57%
11%
12% 3% 1%
*Percentages do not sum to 100% due to numerical rounding.
100
2000
Fatal accidents
Distribution of fatal accidents and onboard fatalities 80
Onboard fatalities
1500
Fatal accidents
Onboard fatalities 60
Fatalities
967
858
1000
716
788 40
617
625 20
500 20
299
275 11 10 7 10 9 9 9 4 4
Taxi, load/
unload
parked,
tow
Takeoff
Initial
Climb
Cruise
Descent
Initial
Final
Landing
climb
approach
approach 21
2006 STATISTICAL SUMMARY, JULY 2007

14. Fatalities by CAST/ICAO Taxonomy Accident Category
Fatal Accidents - Asia (including China) Airline Domicile Through 2006
1200
External fatalities [Total 64]
Onboard fatalities [Total 1,815]
ARC Abnormal Runway Contact
CFIT Controlled Flight into or Toward Terrain
F-NI Fire/Smoke (Non-Impact)
LOC-I Loss of Control – In flight
RE Runway Excursion
SCF-NP System/Component Failure or Malfunction (Non-Powerplant)
SCF-PP System/Component Failure or Malfunction (Powerplant)
No accidents were noted in the following categories:
AMAN Abrupt Maneuver
ADRM Aerodrome
ATM Air Traffic Management/ Communications, Navigation, Surveillance
CABIN Cabin Safety Events
EVAC Evacuation
F-POST Fire/Smoke (Post-Impact)
FUEL Fuel Related
GCOL Ground Collision
ICE Icing
LALT Low Altitude Operations
LOC-G Loss of Control – Ground
MAC Midair/Near Midair Collision
OTHR Other
RAMP Ground Handling
RI-A Runway Incursion – Animal
RI-VAP Runway Incursion – Vehicle, Aircraft or Person
SEC Security Related
TURB Turbulence Encounter
USOS Undershoot/Overshoot
UNK Unknown or Undetermined
WSTRW Wind shear or Thunderstorm
For a complete description go to:
980
1000
800
Onboard fatalities
Fatalities
External fatalities
600
462(61)
400
225
200
108
38(3) 1 1
CFIT
LOC-I
SCF- RE
ARC
FIRE-NI
SCF- NP PP
Number of
Fatal
Accidents
(22) 8 6 1 2 3 1 1
Note: Principal categories as assigned by CAST.

15. No accidents were noted with the following principal categories:
Asia (Including China) Airline Domicile
Fatal Accidents by CAST/ICAO Taxonomy Accident Category
CFIT
LOC-I
ARC RE
SCF-NP
F-NI
SCF-PP 8 6 3 2 1
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
ARC Abnormal Runway Contact
CFIT Controlled Flight into or Toward Terrain
F-NI Fire/Smoke (Non-Impact)
LOC-I Loss of Control – In flight
RE Runway Excursion
SCF-NP System/Component Failure or Malfunction (Non-Powerplant)
SCF-PP System/Component Failure or Malfunction (Powerplant)
No accidents were noted with the following principal categories:
AMAN Abrupt Maneuver
ADRM Aerodrome
ATM Air Traffic Management/Communications, Navigation, Surveillance
CABIN Cabin Safety Events
EVAC Evacuation
F-POST Fire/Smoke (Post-Impact)
FUEL Fuel Related
GCOL Ground Collision
ICE Icing
LALT Low Altitude Operations
LOC-G Loss of Control – Ground
MAC Midair/Near Midair Collision
OTHR Other
RAMP Ground Handling
RI-A Runway Incursion – Animal
RI-VAP Runway Incursion – Vehicle, Aircraft or Person
SEC Security Related
TURB Turbulence Encounter
USOS Undershoot/Overshoot
UNK Unknown or Undetermined
WSTRW Wind shear or Thunderstorm
For a complete description go to:
Note: Principal categories as assigned by CAST

16. Accident Rates Vary by Region of the World
Regional Perspective
Accident Rates Vary by Region of the World
Western-built transport hull loss accidents, by airline domicile, 1997 through 2006
C.I.S.
4.9
Europe
0.7
United States
and Canada
0.5
ESSI
China
0.3
CAST
Middle East
3.0
Asia
1.9
(Excluding
China)
COSCAPS
Africa
12.0
PAAST
ASET
Latin America
and Caribbean
2.4
Oceania
0.0
This chart demonstrates why these regional solutions are so important. It depicts the hull loss accident rate in the various regions of the world. It is clear that different regions have different challenges which most likely can not be addressed in the same manner. For example, methods or procedures developed in Latin America to reduce the CFIT threat may be totally inappropriate in Africa.
This chart also demonstrates to those of us who have been creating these charts for many years that significant progress has been made in reducing the Asia and China regional rates.
Does that mean there is no work left for the COSCAP safety efforts to address?
World
1.16
Accidents per
million departures

17. Possible Reasons for Regional Accident Rate Differences
Infrastructure
Air traffic control
Navigation aids
Airport equipment
Weather services
Airline operations
Procedures
Training
Maintenance
Dispatch
Regulatory oversight
Aviation law
Regulation
Personnel qualifications
Resource constraints
When we have analyzed the accidents over the past several decades, we have identified a number of reasons why accident rates vary from region to region, State to State, and airline to airline. These reasons involve three major areas: Infrastructure, including air traffic control and facilities; Airline operations, including differences in standard operating procedures and training; and regulatory oversight, including the implementation and utilization of aviation laws and regulations.
But in a larger sense, this tells us that there are many reasons why accident rates differ – it tells us that although we can look to other regions to help, we have to be careful how we use their insight and guidance – we have to make sure that interventions developed for one region are carefully analyzed to ensure that they are appropriate for another region.

18. Commercial Aviation Safety Team (CAST)
Industry
Government
AIA
Airbus
ALPA
APA
ATA
NACA
Boeing
GE*
RAA
FSF
IATA
AAPA
ATAC
APFA
DOD
FAA
Aircraft Certification
Flight Standards
System Safety
Air Traffic Operations
Research
NASA
ICAO
EASA
TCC
NATCA
NTSB
Commercial Aviation
Safety Team
(CAST)
With those caveats in mind, let us take a look at what one of these regional activities has to offer COSCAP North Asia. You have heard a little about CAST already, but let me just briefly remind you that CAST is comprised of Industry and Government organizations that represent all aspects of the commercial aviation community in the United States. These organizations have come together voluntarily to improve aviation safety. The strength of CAST lies in it’s extensive membership, it’s proactive commitment to safety and it’s ability to effect change.
As a member of the CAST Executive team, I would be happy to answer any specific questions you may have regarding CAST.
What I want to address is a question we an Executive team presented to our JIMDAT, or Joint Implementation Management and Data Analysis Team.
*Representing P&W and RR

19. Worldwide Risk Analysis
CAST plan developed to reduce fatality risk in U.S. Part 121 operations
Question was raised by ICAO, PAAST and ESSI as to effectiveness of CAST plan worldwide
Worldwide fatal accident data from 1987 – analyzed using the CAST selection tool
331 accidents, which had sufficient data, were analyzed and scored
The CAST plan was selected to reduce the fatality risk of U. S. Part 121 operations. Questions were raised by other groups such as the JAA Safety Strategic Initiative (JSSI), International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), and the Pan American Aviation Safety Team (PAAST) as to the possible effectiveness of the CAST plan in other parts of the world. Also, since U. S. operators fly throughout the world, CAST wanted to know if there were risks outside the U. S. that were not being addressed by the CAST plan. The JIMDAT was requested to analyze worldwide accident data using a risk assessment approach. They developed a tool to help them accomplish this.
The worldwide accident data for the period 1988 through 2001 was acquired and reviewed. From the over 500 accidents that occurred during the period 331 were selected that had sufficient data available to perform the analysis.
The complete results of the analysis are available and clearly show the general effectiveness of the enhancements in the CAST plan.
Let us look briefly at some of the results of their worldwide risk analysis.

20. (1987-2001 Equivalent Part 121 Fatal Accidents)
Portion of the Fatality Risk in Each Accident Location Region Attributed to CFIT
( Equivalent Part 121 Fatal Accidents)
100 90 80 70
Portion of Regional Fatality Risk 60 50 40 30
As I mentioned earlier, CAST recognizes that not all of the plan agreed to by CAST members can be implemented in all regions at the same rate and effectiveness level as CAST is trying to implement in the United States.
The North Asia Regional Aviation Safety Team recently met here in Beijing to identify and begin the implementation of a risk reduction plan tailored for the Region. You will hear more about the details of the plan, but the CAST JIMDAT used their risk assessment methodology to estimate the potential effectiveness of the NARAST plan.
It showed that the items selected for the implementation by the NARAST will result in a predicted 57% reduction of fatality risk in the region. It also shows that when other CAST enhancements currently under development or implementation are completed, there will be additional actions available for NARAST consideration.
Thus, the CAST assessment shows that the NARAST plan has addressed a significant amount of the risk present in Asia, but, like CAST, they will have much work to do to in the future to continue improvements 20 10
Latin America
& Caribbean
Asia
Europe
Africa
North America

21. Portion of the Fatality Risk in Each Accident Location Region
Attributed to CFIT That Can be Mitigated If CAST Plan is Adopted
(2007 Implementation Values)
Equivalent Part 121 Fatal and Hull Loss Accidents 70
Risk Eliminated 60
Risk Remaining 50
Portion of
Regional
Fatality
Risk
(Percent) 40 30
This chart shows the potential fatality risk reduction in various regions of the world for one accident type – CFIT. The blue portion of each bar shows the percentage of the CFIT accident risk that would be eliminated in that region if the entire CAST plan was adopted.
A couple of points can be made from looking at this data.
First, each region has a different CFIT risk level. In Asia, approximately 53% of the fatality risk involves CFIT accidents.
Second, the CAST plan is more effective in reducing the fatality risk in some regions than in others. It is particularly effective in Asia with only approximately 3 percent of the CFIT fatality risk remaining if the complete CAST plan would be adopted. 20 10
Latin America
& Caribbean
Asia
Europe
World
Africa
North America

22. Conclusion
Commercial air travel is extraordinarily safe, but improvements must continue to be made
Not all areas or environments of the world are the same — we need to use facts, data, and continuing insight to focus appropriate improvement efforts
Improving safety in Asia is a shared responsibility of the manufacturers, the airline operators, and Government/State authorities, but it will take willingness and commitment to make it happen
COSCAP regional safety teams and similar safety organizations can help to reduce accident risk
Considerations should be given to implementing appropriate CAST Safety Enhancements to reduce fatality risk
Airbus and Boeing are committed to help enhance aviation safety
Rapid growth of commercial aviation in ASIA presents significant challenges
So, that is what I wanted to talk with you about today. I’ve tried to share with you some of the facts, data and perspective that we have acquired while working with you and our other aviation partners around the world. Here, in summary are the
Remember that Commercial aviation is extraordinarily safe, but even with our safety record, we must continue to improve. Our airline customers expect – no demand it of us.
We must remember that not all areas of the world are the same. We have to use facts, data, and continuing insight to focus on the appropriate efforts necessary to support our mutual safety vision – to address the problems in a manner appropriate for your region
We all must work together to continue to improve safety in North Asia It’s a shared responsibility of you as regulators, we as manufacturers, and the operators in the region. But remember, it takes not only a willingness, but also a dedicated commitment to make this happen.
The NARAST has developed an effective plan to begin addressing the safety issues facing the region
We at Boeing are committed to working with you and our other aviation partners around the globe to make this vision of safety a reality – both directly and as members of the Commercial Aviation Safety Team

23. Next Steps
Measure implementation levels and effectiveness of processes and procedures already put in place (e.g. adopted CAST Safety Enhancements)
Integrate appropriate elements of the Global Aviation Safety Roadmap
Identify gaps that exist and form plans to address
Establish an information-sharing process to better gauge effectiveness of enhancements and identify emerging threats
So, that is what I wanted to talk with you about today. I’ve tried to share with you some of the facts, data and perspective that we have acquired while working with you and our other aviation partners around the world. Here, in summary are the
Remember that Commercial aviation is extraordinarily safe, but even with our safety record, we must continue to improve. Our airline customers expect – no demand it of us.
We must remember that not all areas of the world are the same. We have to use facts, data, and continuing insight to focus on the appropriate efforts necessary to support our mutual safety vision – to address the problems in a manner appropriate for your region
We all must work together to continue to improve safety in North Asia It’s a shared responsibility of you as regulators, we as manufacturers, and the operators in the region. But remember, it takes not only a willingness, but also a dedicated commitment to make this happen.
The NARAST has developed an effective plan to begin addressing the safety issues facing the region
We at Boeing are committed to working with you and our other aviation partners around the globe to make this vision of safety a reality – both directly and as members of the Commercial Aviation Safety Team