dtw2hyd
Posts: 2980
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Wed Sep 18, 2013 10:45 pm

Taking a tough stand against Japan for not permitting Air India to operate its new Boeing 787 Dreamliners there, aviation regulator DGCA has rejected a request from its Japanese counterpart to carry out a safety audit of the Indian aviation sector.

Interesting, it allowed audits from ICAO and FAA, but rejected JCAB.

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/...iner-row-india-rejects-japans.html
 
SonomaFlyer
Posts: 1881
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 2:47 pm

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Wed Sep 18, 2013 11:11 pm

It might be because both the ICAO and the FAA audits went well. India is saying, we've been audited twice and passed twice so take a hike.

I'm no fan of the Indian burocracy but I don't see the point of another audit after the first two supposedly didn't reveal anything to upset the Cat 1 status.
 
PHX787
Posts: 7881
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:51 am

Bureaucracy, and a VERY BAD move on the part of India.

Japan will most likely draw some sanctions against AI for this.
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
pnqiad
Posts: 375
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 5:05 am

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 3:36 am

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 2):
Bureaucracy, and a VERY BAD move on the part of India.

Care to elaborate why India should bend over - especially when ICAO audit has already affirmed cat 1 rating? I am actually glad India asked Japan to go take a hike....doesn't happen quite frequently...
 
Carpethead
Posts: 2566
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 8:15 pm

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 3:59 am

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 2):
Japan will most likely draw some sanctions against AI for this.

India will just retaliate back with NH & JL services being not allowed.
Only travellers heading both direction will suffer.

Cooler heads and more negotiations.
 
kaitak
Posts: 8969
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 1999 5:49 am

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:21 am

I thought the 787 issue had been resolved? Is Japan still not allowing the AI 787s in?
 
MD11Engineer
Posts: 13916
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 5:25 am

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:28 am

Every aviation authority does their own audits. The company I work for is certified by the EASA, the FAA, the Russian aviation authority, the aviation authority of the Bermudas and every other aviation authority, which´s aircraft we maintain, including the Chinese CAAC, the one of the UAE and of Qatar and the Japanese one, carry out regular audits. Sometimes we have an audit every week.

Jan
Je Suis Charlie et je suis Ahmet aussi
 
747megatop
Posts: 1467
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 8:22 am

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:35 am

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 2):
Bureaucracy, and a VERY BAD move on the part of India.

Why is it a very bad move by India? Japan is being unrealistic here. Why is Japan demanding a safety audit in the first place? Have they asked for a similar safety audit from other countries? Too premature to say bad move by India. If Japan is demanding the same from other countries then probably what you say is true and DGCA should comply whether it likes it or not. If it is a selective request to India then DGCA did the right thing by asking Japan to take a hike.

[Edited 2013-09-18 22:42:33]
 
User avatar
airportugal310
Posts: 3217
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 12:49 pm

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 6:35 am

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 6):

This is the right answer. In my line of work, audits by different parties on the same system are a weekly/monthly occurrence...not sure what India's real issue is.
I sell airplanes and airplane accessories
 
PHX787
Posts: 7881
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 6:59 am

It's a bad move because Japan hates being snubbed diplomatically like this. When you go against something like that in Japan, unfortunately Japan does not respond well to it.
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
aloges
Posts: 14842
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 3:38 am

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 8:24 am

Quoting airportugal310 (Reply 8):
not sure what India's real issue is.

Pride, which is one of the worst things to affect flight safety. It kills.
Don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened.
 
ha763
Posts: 3168
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 5:36 pm

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 9:17 am

Quoting 747megatop (Reply 7):
Why is it a very bad move by India? Japan is being unrealistic here. Why is Japan demanding a safety audit in the first place? Have they asked for a similar safety audit from other countries?

See MD11Engineer's reply above yours. It is common practice that a country's aviation authority will audit another country's aviation practices. This is how the FAA determines if a country is considered Category 1 or Category 2 or the EASA determines which airlines to put on or take off their blacklist.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 2980
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:29 pm

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 2):
Japan will most likely draw some sanctions against AI for this.

India is probably prepared for that. AI operates 3 weekly on a 77L. Probably loosing lot of money.

Who is the root of B787's battery problems? Japan. If GS Yuasa designed, built and tested the battery system, there wouldn't be a grounding. If Japan is the root the problem and don't know how to fix it keep low profile and hope problem will go away Don't pick on a easy target to cover your incompetency. Boeing paid a hefty price for GS Yuasa's short comings and even today there is no fix to actual problem, there is only a steel case. BTW all B787 customers are loosing money because of the steel case.

Who worked on B787 battery fix. Boeing engineers. If AI did their own fix you can question their process. Now it is a moot point.

Quoting aloges (Reply 10):
Quoting airportugal310 (Reply 8):
not sure what India's real issue is.

Pride, which is one of the worst things to affect flight safety. It kills.

It is also to do with priority. If AI is operating just 3 weekly net loss flights, it is probably better to shut the route down.

It allowed ICAO and FAA audits. It may even allow Europe, Australia and UAE.

Japan said problem is with B787 documentation about battery fix and flights right after the fix, so AI switched to 77L, now Japan wants to audit all documents. So India has to draw the line somewhere.

[Edited 2013-09-19 05:30:39]
 
Carpethead
Posts: 2566
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 8:15 pm

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:57 pm

Quoting DTW2HYD (Reply 12):
Who is the root of B787's battery problems? Japan. If GS Yuasa designed, built and tested the battery system, there wouldn't be a grounding.

Whoa. I am not going to defend GS Yuasa in anyway, but this not just a battery problem but a systems problem that goes top to bottom and reverse.


What's up will all this anti-Japan statements recently on this site.
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 2:56 pm

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 6):
Every aviation authority does their own audits. The company I work for is certified by the EASA, the FAA, the Russian aviation authority, the aviation authority of the Bermudas and every other aviation authority, which´s aircraft we maintain, including the Chinese CAAC, the one of the UAE and of Qatar and the Japanese one, carry out regular audits. Sometimes we have an audit every week.

  

Its the nature of the industry.

There is really no room for such intransigence by Indian authorities.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
garudaa
Posts: 17
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2011 7:23 pm

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 4:01 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 14):

Here the issue is that JCAB coming up with different reasons at the flip of the coin. First it was the documentation for 787s and now when 787s where withdrawn they come up with another reason "audit " . I think there is some one in JCAB who can still come up with something that will help this issue 'coz I think DGCA has moved on and what I see is ordinary citizens from both sides not having a direct means to fly.   
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 4:27 pm

Getting frustrating and refusing are two things.

This certainly is not the first time JCAB has been to review what the Indian authorities are up to.

Its part of global aviation politics, and its best to play along. If you don't like it, let the diplomats handle things behind the scenes, while the aviation folks follow their orders for now.

While I have no particular insight into this specific issue, it seems to me the Indian authorities are the ones that tend to be the more emotional and schizophrenic ones in their dealings then my experience with Japanese authorities last few decades.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
747megatop
Posts: 1467
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 8:22 am

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 6:04 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 14):
Its the nature of the industry.

Reading "MD11Engineer"'s reply; yes, it is similar to Boeing (the manufacturer) or UAL (the airline for example) being audited by the Chinese or Australians before allowing their planes into operate into their airspace. It is a different ballgame though when we are talking about the Chinese or the Australians telling FAA & EASA that, hey look - we don't trust your practices, we would like to audit you (FAA & EASA) guys. The FAA and EASA are simply not going to roll over just because the Australians/Chinese asked them to unless there is some kind of mutual 2 way working agreement between them; something on these lines -

http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/repair/media/EASA_US_roadshows.pdf


http://www.easa.europa.eu/rulemaking...A%20EASA-JCAB%20final%20signed.pdf

http://www.easa.europa.eu/rulemaking...ina/WA%20CAAC-EASA%20FAsL-A320.pdf

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 14):
There is really no room for such intransigence by Indian authorities.

Really, how so? Please explain with some logic, otherwise it is a blanket statement at best that does not hold water. DGCA passed ICAO certification; which leads one to believe that they met international standards. So, since JCAB is asking to audit DGCA again it means one of 2 things -
1) The ICAO audit was eye wash. ICAO is incompetent and their auditing practices and their standards are questionable.

OR

2) JCAB's practices are totally different from the "international standards" that ICAO recognizes as safe practices and certified the DGCA for; which means that JCAB's practices are questionable since they don't see eye to eye with ICAO.

In view of the above; i think ICAO and JCAB should actually be audited to figure out what is going on. Obviously they don't see eye to eye and ICAO audits are a waste of time.

Quoting aloges (Reply 10):
Pride, which is one of the worst things to affect flight safety. It kills.

Pride!! really? Obviously pride is involved here to a certain extent and we would be lying if we say there isn't. But i would wonder what would happen if in the interest of "flight safety" the Chinese, the UAE authorities, the Indian DGCA and a bunch of others jointly order a full audit of the certification process of the FAA & JCAB for the Boeing 787 and other Boeing aircraft types since certification practices of the FAA have been largely questioned and faulted after the 787 fiasco - http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2020288737_787faaxml.html .Obviously the FAA and EASA are not going to rollover, there will be a certain pride involved in them too.

[Edited 2013-09-19 11:19:53]

[Edited 2013-09-19 11:21:21]
 
mercure1
Posts: 2773
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 5:13 am

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 6:23 pm

Quoting 747megatop (Reply 17):
DGCA passed ICAO certification; which leads one to believe that they met international standards.

I hope you realize ICAO standards are the thinnest regulations in the world. Its not a very high standard.

The only manner anything gets done at ICAO (a UN organization) is because its based on the lowest common denominator. Everyone from Zimbabwe, to China, to Poland influences the regulatory frame work.

Individual nations (eg Japan, USA, etc) have rights to augment any ICAO guidance with their own levels of regulation.

Quoting 747megatop (Reply 17):
unch of others jointly order a full audit of the certification process of the FAA & JCAB for the Boeing 787 and other Boeing aircraft types.

And then it would be up to Mr. Boeing to produce aircraft and meet the certification requirements of these other parties.

In effect this already happens. You realize many FAA approved items for example are not compliant with foreign authorities. One of the most glaring was the UK, where Boeing for decades had to build all types of differences in their aircraft from cockpit instruments, to cabin doors to meet UK requirements.

To this day, many internal items on aircraft must be modified to meet local regulatory regulations. Just because its blessed by FAA or EASA does not mean its ok universally.
 
HeeseokKoo
Posts: 592
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 5:54 pm

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 6:26 pm

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 2):
Bureaucracy, and a VERY BAD move on the part of India.

Japan will most likely draw some sanctions against AI for this.

We definitely know someone who won't get Haneda international flight slot.
 
MD11Engineer
Posts: 13916
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 5:25 am

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 6:28 pm

Quoting 747megatop (Reply 17):
Reading "MD11Engineer"'s reply; yes, it is similar to Boeing (the manufacturer) or UAL (the airline for example) being audited by the Chinese or Australians before allowing their planes into operate into their airspace. It is a different ballgame though when we are talking about the Chinese or the Australians telling FAA & EASA that, hey look - we don't trust your practices, we would like to audit you (FAA & EASA) guys. The FAA and EASA are simply not going to roll over just because the Australians/Chinese asked them to unless there is some kind of mutual 2 way working agreement between them; something on these lines -

The fact is that e.g. the Chinese (we don´t have Australian customers) audit us, even though there has been an EASA audit just a week before and our company operates to EASA standards.
ICAO sets the MINIMUM standards. Every country is free to set higher standards for the use of their airspace, and the Japanese authorities are one of the strictest (trying to figure out how I can get a Japanese licence, without having to be fluent in Japanese).
And every authority has different rules (before EASA we had different rules for each European country).
The Japanese are totally correct here and the Indians are acting stubborn.

Jan
Je Suis Charlie et je suis Ahmet aussi
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 6:34 pm

Quoting mercure1 (Reply 18):
I hope you realize ICAO standards are the thinnest regulations in the world. Its not a very high standard.

  

ICAO is the most basic baseline regulations the industry has. Grafted on top of the ICAO regulations come local authorities (eg FAA) and industry groups (eg ARINC with avionics) with their own guidance and requirements.

Quoting 747megatop (Reply 17):
The ICAO audit was eye wash. ICAO is incompetent and their auditing practices and their standards are questionable.

Yes ICAO audit is rather basic, they are not incompetent, but the framework qualification is rather minimal, so just because you pass ICAO does not mean you hold no fault.

Look back in history. USSR was a big ICAO member, and its aircraft were compliant with ICAO rules, but could not be certified under stricter US, UK or other western regulations.

Same goes to the operational, maintenance and safety practices of airlines, and countries. They might meet basic ICAO qualifications, but fail to achieve higher standards imposed by individual nations.


At the end of the day, its for India to meet Japan's needs, no matter how bizarre they might seem to the Indians. Obviously many many other carriers have done so, so it can certainly be achieved.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
luckyone
Posts: 2302
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 6:44 pm

Quoting airportugal310 (Reply 8):
This is the right answer. In my line of work, audits by different parties on the same system are a weekly/monthly occurrence...not sure what India's real issue is.
Quoting ha763 (Reply 11):
See MD11Engineer's reply above yours. It is common practice that a country's aviation authority will audit another country's aviation practices.

It's not just aviation. I used to work in Quality Assurance in a pharmaceuticals and medical device facility. We had, and conducted audits all the time. In short, you do not put your own liability on the line based on somebody else's audit, UNLESS you have hired them specifically to do so. In another instance, during the time of the Beijing Olympics one of our suppliers shut down their factory temporarily to comply with pollution regulations and concerns set forth by the Chinese government. As a result of not having audited the new, temporary facility and its QA methods, we (meaning me) had to do full USP testing, as opposed to the streamlined testing we had done prior.

It sounds like India is playing politics with the Japanese, and regardless of how it hurt the Japanese pride (a silly notion if you ask me) it can come back to bite them in the butt quite quickly because it can be argued that they are willing to place the safety of people on the line as a political tool.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 2980
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 6:54 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 21):
Yes ICAO audit is rather basic, they are not incompetent, but the framework qualification is rather minimal, so just because you pass ICAO does not mean you hold no fault.

DGCA also cleared FAA audit last week. If JCAB is world's supreme CAA, FAA & EASA should take back seat.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 20):

You are probably working for an MRO facility and CAA from any customer country can audit your facility. If JCAB wants to audit a facility which services JL/NH in India they can very well do so.

BTW all MRO facilities in India are FAA/EASA certified. AI is not the only game in town. Airworks(India) does good amount of work. Malaysian Airlines MRO has a joint venture in India.

http://www.airindia.com/Images/pdf/AirIndia_Engneering_Services.pdf
http://www.airworks.in/commercialaviation.asp
http://www.masgmr-aerotech.in/

[Edited 2013-09-19 11:56:54]

[Edited 2013-09-19 12:31:18]
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 8:06 pm

Quoting DTW2HYD (Reply 23):
DGCA also cleared FAA audit last week.

Great, then only another hoop to jump through with Japan.

Quoting DTW2HYD (Reply 23):
If JCAB is world's supreme CAA, FAA & EASA should take back seat.

No one is supreme at all, but like all they have the right to manage their own requirements.

Anyhow, its not like India does not have its own unique set of regulatory burdens when it comes to many industries.  
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 2980
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 8:35 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 24):
Great, then only another hoop to jump through with Japan.

It could but for some reason I think AI will stop service to Japan. Japan pushing a B788 customer on a battery fix issue comes out as pot calling the kettle black.
 
phxa340
Posts: 985
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:07 am

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 8:48 pm

Quoting DTW2HYD (Reply 12):
BTW all B787 customers are loosing money because of the steel case.

Care to elaborate on this ? This is the first time I have heard this.
 
SATexan
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 6:49 pm

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 9:02 pm

Curious question. Does anyone know if other countries routinely audit the FAA and clear their practices?
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 2980
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 9:16 pm

Quoting phxa340 (Reply 26):
Quoting DTW2HYD (Reply 12):
BTW all B787 customers are loosing money because of the steel case.

Care to elaborate on this ? This is the first time I have heard this.

150 lb deadweight doesn't fly without burning additional fuel. No customer signed up for this additional weight until Boeing finds another battery design. Elan Musk, Hint hint.

Quoting SATexan (Reply 27):
Does anyone know if other countries routinely audit the FAA and clear their practices?

747megatop answered this question in reply 17. FAA & EASA have a pact, where auditors from other agency can participate during internal audits. Same goes for inspections.
 
747megatop
Posts: 1467
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 8:22 am

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 10:02 pm

I think it is in the interest of both the Japanese and Indian authorities to jointly come to an agreement on this and establish a working agreement. Both JCAB and DGCA should open themselves up for audit by each other. Similar to how our FAA has working agreements/cooperations in place with other international counterparts and similar to how EASA has agreements in place with other counterparts - https://www.easa.europa.eu/rulemaking/international-cooperation-working-arrangements.php . I am not a fan of Indian Beuracracy too but i agree to what SonomaFlyer said in reply 1 -

Quoting SonomaFlyer (Reply 1):
I'm no fan of the Indian burocracy but I don't see the point of another audit after the first two supposedly didn't reveal anything to upset the Cat 1 status.

There has to be a method in the madness and multiple redundant audits (and that too with differing standards and procedures) does not necessarily improve aviation safety. Maybe ICAO audits and safety standards need to be more streamlined and standardized so that once an ICAO audit of a member country is done, that certification carries weight and that country need not be audited again and again in every country that it is operating in. Don't get me wrong, I am all for the strictest standards in aviation safety and India should be held accountable to the strictest audits and standards there is (at the cost of even banning them from flying to other countries if found unable to meet those standards) but that does not mean they they or any other country for that matter start getting audited without any logical explanation and rhyme or reason especially when the same setup has been audited by at least 2 other agencies. (and yes i have read the other posts about ICAO regulations being the common denominator etc.; then, i still think ICAO certifications need to be more streamlined, standardised and improved..that should be the approach going forward).

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 24):
Anyhow, its not like India does not have its own unique set of regulatory burdens when it comes to many industries.

Well, how does it become "regulatory burden" like you have put it and "beuraucracy" like others have put it when India demands compliance with something and how does it become "aviation safety" and "strictest regulations" like others have described the Japanese when Japanese make the demands? To me it should be a 2 way street and JCAB and DGCA should come to a mutual working agreement and agree to auditing each other; otherwise it smacks of double standards. Like it or not that is the politics of aviation and so be it.
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 7705
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 11:08 pm

Quoting DTW2HYD (Thread starter):
Taking a tough stand against Japan for not permitting Air India to operate its new Boeing 787 Dreamliners there, aviation regulator DGCA has rejected a request from its Japanese counterpart to carry out a safety audit of the Indian aviation sector.

Of course India bans A380s for no good reason...

Besides, when safety is involved, you always have to show you're ready to prove you're up to snuff, this sends a very wrong message. If they really wanted to "take a stab" at Japan, the right answer was : "sure come over, meanwhile we'll return the courtesy and audit Japan !".
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
747megatop
Posts: 1467
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 8:22 am

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Thu Sep 19, 2013 11:29 pm

Quoting Aesma (Reply 30):
Besides, when safety is involved, you always have to show you're ready to prove you're up to snuff, this sends a very wrong message. If they really wanted to "take a stab" at Japan, the right answer was : "sure come over, meanwhile we'll return the courtesy and audit Japan !".

   which is what i had mentioned in my earlier post. And they should further say that if you guys are not open for our audit then please don't bother flying.
 
PHX787
Posts: 7881
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Fri Sep 20, 2013 12:27 am

Quoting Carpethead (Reply 13):
What's up will all this anti-Japan statements recently on this site.

Agreed. It's odd....

here's a small joke, if you were to ask a friend of mine he'd blame Koreans about it without explaining ....   hahah

Quoting HeeseokKoo (Reply 19):
We definitely know someone who won't get Haneda international flight slot.

   that's probaby true now.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 21):
ICAO is the most basic baseline regulations the industry has. Grafted on top of the ICAO regulations come local authorities (eg FAA) and industry groups (eg ARINC with avionics) with their own guidance and requirements.

Exactly, and if anyone's been to Japan they'll see that everything here is about safety. Seriously. Safety is absolutely key here. Companies will shell out thousands of dollars just for the most advanced safety features. It's why you can have excessively skinny and narrow roads here without a high rate of auto crashes!
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 2980
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Fri Sep 20, 2013 1:15 am

Quoting Aesma (Reply 30):
Besides, when safety is involved, you always have to show you're ready to prove you're up to snuff, this sends a very wrong message. If they really wanted to "take a stab" at Japan, the right answer was : "sure come over, meanwhile we'll return the courtesy and audit Japan !".

This approach makes sense with a country you want to do business. I am sure India will be open to an audit from EASA/CASA/GCCA or any other country it wants operate. Problem is Japan rubbed the wrong way. For 4 months Japan said AI cannot fly 787. So AI switched to 77L. After ICAO/FAA successfully cleared DGCA now JCAB wants to audit.

AI should say sayanora to Japan. If JL/NH feel safe they can fly to India otherwise they shouldn't. Japan also can kiss $8 Billion exports to India good bye. Japanese obsession about quality/safety is all BS. Toyota USA fiasco and Fukushima incidents prove it.

Indian Government is very diplomatic. Let Japan request CAAC (China) audit, and wait for the response. It will be a memorable one.

[Edited 2013-09-19 18:51:06]
 
mercure1
Posts: 2773
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 5:13 am

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Fri Sep 20, 2013 1:38 am

Again, if India feels its aviation is up to snuff, open your doors and be happy to put on a nice show for the Japanese.
They certainly are fully right to impose their own requirements above and beyond bare bones ICAO regulations.

Btw I hope you realize, the Japanese inspect French airlines also. I don't see France complaining. Even Australia CASA comes and inspects French airlines as well.

Its part of the global business. One has to comply with the regulatory authorities of various countries in the world where one desires to do business.

I am sure India requires a host of regulations on the business products of foreign entities which might be different then their home markets. But if they wish to do business with India they will comply right?
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 9944
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Fri Sep 20, 2013 1:52 am

Quoting SonomaFlyer (Reply 1):

It might be because both the ICAO and the FAA audits went well. India is saying, we've been audited twice and passed twice so take a hike.

Every country has the right to prevent operators from entering their airspace under the safety banner. EASA and the FAA ban a number of operators and countries.

Quoting SonomaFlyer (Reply 1):

It might be because both the ICAO and the FAA audits went well. India is saying, we've been audited twice and passed twice so take a hike.

That does not mean much, the FAA audit probably was in line with the Part 129 certificate, which is related to the way Indian carriers operate into/out of the US. It does not cover other countries. The same airline can operate differently into different countries.

The other aspect will have to the actual authority, if the DGAC has issued the TCDS for the Indian 787s, it is also then responsible for issuing the ADs for the same. This might be a subtle way of identifying that India has not issued an AD for the issues that grounded many 787s. So the aircraft could potentially be going around "unsafe" by Japanese, FAA, EASA standards.

The core issue here has not been identified.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 6):
Every aviation authority does their own audits.

Correct, and most authorities issue something equivalent to a Foreign Air Operators Certificate to international carriers that stipulate how they are to operate into their country.

Quoting 747megatop (Reply 7):
Why is Japan demanding a safety audit in the first place? Have they asked for a similar safety audit from other countries?

They do.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 21):
ICAO is the most basic baseline regulations the industry has.

They are ICAO SARPs, Standards and Recommended Practices, they are then adopted by member states in local regulations. ICAO is not a regulator.
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
 
User avatar
Pellegrine
Posts: 1828
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:19 am

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Fri Sep 20, 2013 1:56 am

An adequate response would have been for India's DGCA to audit Japanese Indian operations and all would be well. Reciprocity is standard in international relations.

Quoting DTW2HYD (Reply 33):

Sounds like your knickers are all in a twist.   
oh boy, here we go!!!
 
747megatop
Posts: 1467
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 8:22 am

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Fri Sep 20, 2013 3:05 am

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 36):
An adequate response would have been for India's DGCA to audit Japanese Indian operations

Not just the Indian operations, think DGCA would probably want to audit JCAB fully including their Japanese setup. From what i understood JCAB wants to fully audit DGCA fully including it's setup in India; not just AI's Japanese operations.
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Fri Sep 20, 2013 11:41 am

Quoting DTW2HYD (Reply 25):
Japan pushing a B788 customer on a battery fix issue comes out as pot calling the kettle black.

DTW, you really need to stop making assertions without any basis. The fact is NO ONE KNOWS what caused to batteries to fail. Not even Boeing is blaming Yuasa.

Quoting DTW2HYD (Reply 23):
BTW all MRO facilities in India are FAA/EASA certified. AI is not the only game in town. Airworks(India) does good amount of work. Malaysian Airlines MRO has a joint venture in India.

What has that got to do with the topic at hand?

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 24):
Anyhow, its not like India does not have its own unique set of regulatory burdens when it comes to many industries.

Exactly. Pot-kettle-black actually applies well here.

Quoting DTW2HYD (Reply 28):
150 lb deadweight doesn't fly without burning additional fuel. No customer signed up for this additional weight until Boeing finds another battery design. Elan Musk, Hint hint.

Not the same thing as saying "every 787 operator is making losses" thanks to this.

Quoting DTW2HYD (Reply 33):
AI should say sayanora to Japan. If JL/NH feel safe they can fly to India otherwise they shouldn't. Japan also can kiss $8 Billion exports to India good bye.

This arrogant attitude really does not serve any country well, especially one that still depends on imports for critical needs.

Quoting DTW2HYD (Reply 33):
Indian Government is very diplomatic. Let Japan request CAAC (China) audit, and wait for the response.

China is very pragmatic in these matters, their response would be a mature one.

Quoting mercure1 (Reply 34):
Btw I hope you realize, the Japanese inspect French airlines also. I don't see France complaining. Even Australia CASA comes and inspects French airlines as well.

Exactly.

Quoting DTW2HYD (Reply 38):
Stay on topic. Adults are having important conversation.

Some adults are trying to explain to others why some people (*hint*) should not repeatedly make arrogant and sweeping assertions without any basis in facts.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 2980
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Fri Sep 20, 2013 12:34 pm

Quoting sankaps (Reply 38):

All nice talking points . Can you show me one example where a CAA allowed audit from another country to which none of its airlines planning to operate. If AI already decided to cut Japan service there is no need for audit. Do you think Australia allowed AI to start service after 16 years without a fresh audit?
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6692
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Fri Sep 20, 2013 12:37 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 21):
ICAO is the most basic baseline regulations the industry has. Grafted on top of the ICAO regulations come local authorities (eg FAA) and industry groups (eg ARINC with avionics) with their own guidance and requirements.

Maybe the more stringent nations should have their standards adapted as the default and do away with ICAO.

Quoting mercure1 (Reply 34):
Again, if India feels its aviation is up to snuff, open your doors and be happy to put on a nice show for the Japanese.
They certainly are fully right to impose their own requirements above and beyond bare bones ICAO regulations.

Is this like not having anything to hide so anyone can come search your home and do a blood test?

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 36):
An adequate response would have been for India's DGCA to audit Japanese Indian operations and all would be well. Reciprocity is standard in international relations.

Why, does India have a problem with Japanese a/c / ailine / infrastructure or should they do this just to be politically correct?

Quoting sankaps (Reply 38):

This arrogant attitude really does not serve any country well, especially one that still depends on imports for critical needs.

Both nations rely on imports, for Japan it may be more critical give the extent of their industrial base.

So far not many have questioned the continued moving of the goal post and the reason's for it.
Is it true that Japan denied AI 787 flights?
Did AI pull the 787 thes use the 777L's?
Is Japan now objecting to the 777L or now need to inspect something other than the actual a/c?
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Fri Sep 20, 2013 12:46 pm

Quoting par13del (Reply 40):
So far not many have questioned the continued moving of the goal post and the reason's for it.

The Japanese will not likely openly come out and say publicly why they are wanting to audit. Given AI has flown to Japan for 50 years or so, it must be something specific that has come up to cause concern. It is unlikely they would just randomly start doing this.

Perhaps it has something to do with India having being placed on the ICAO blacklist for safety oversight, which was only removed in April this year. http://www.livemint.com/Politics/f0T...moved-from-aviation-blacklist.html .

Maybe that spooked them -- if the most lenient of all audits could land India in the blacklist, would it pass Japan's standards?
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Fri Sep 20, 2013 12:51 pm

In addition, this article sheds some light too... http://www.aviationpros.com/news/111...ists-several-areas-for-improvement . Seems the FAA audit found issues too.

Excerpt from the article: "Indeed, since Air India hasn't maintained documents of its first flights with the new 787 aircraft, and fumbled to provide details, FAA believed there was something amiss, according to a second DGCA official who also asked not to be identified.

"There was only a lack of documentation," said the first DGCA official. "There is a cultural gap too. We don't document everything. ""

"The official added that DGCA plans to induct about 100 officers to its headcount of about 350 and prepare training policies for its officials as part of its effort to address the issues raised by FAA."

[Edited 2013-09-20 05:53:01]
 
mats01776
Posts: 125
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 6:10 pm

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Fri Sep 20, 2013 12:54 pm

This article adds some historical perspective that was missing in the article referred to in the OP:
http://www.livemint.com/Politics/Ztv...t-DGCA-filings-by-Jet-Air-Ind.html

Quote:

...The United Nation’s International Civil Aviation Organization (Icao) had after an audit of the DGCA in December clubbed India among 13 nations with the worst air safety oversight. It removed India from its blacklist only in August after a compliance audit of DGCA’s mechanisms.
...Icao had in its December report identified a “significant safety concern with respect to the ability of this state (India) to properly oversee areas” under airworthiness and operations.
The concern on airworthiness related to approval of major modifications and repairs carried out on foreign manufactured aircraft and registered in India.
The concern on operations related to the procedure for grant of air operator permits to non-scheduled operators and the flight documentation systems of scheduled airlines.
Icao had clubbed India with 12 other nations including Angola, Congo, Eritrea, Haiti, Kazakhstan and Lebanon as having the worst air safety oversight.
That report resulted in Japan stalling Air India’s plan to start flights to Osaka and prompted the FAA to seek an independent audit, Mint reported on 21 August.


Personally, I think DGCA's best course of action is to demand a reciprocal audit of JCAB and let the chips fall where they may.

[Edited 2013-09-20 06:02:14]
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 2980
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Fri Sep 20, 2013 1:15 pm

Quoting sankaps (Reply 41):

ICAO/FAA findings are related to maintenance of General Aviation Aircraft mainly charter/corporate jets flying out of country. DGCA agreed to impose restrictions charter/corporate jets. Nothing to do with commercial aviation.

Quoting par13del (Reply 40):
Is it true that Japan denied AI 787 flights?

Yes, Japan wanted documentation related to immediate flights after B787 battery fix. DGCA was not aware of this documentation at that time and they fixed the issue.

Quoting par13del (Reply 40):
Did AI pull the 787 thes use the 777L's?

Yes. Right now it operates 3 weekly DEL-NRT on 77L and a daily HKG-KIX on a 77L. DEL-NRT doesn't make sense on a 77L and probably not even on a 788.

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/A...6/history/20130920/1540Z/VIDP/RJAA
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/A...4/history/20130921/0005Z/VHHH/RJBB

Quoting par13del (Reply 40):
Is Japan now objecting to the 777L or now need to inspect something other than the actual a/c?

No they are not objecting to 77L. JCAB just wants to audit DGCA.

AI can better use B788s some where else, so they are not interested in dealing with Japan as of now.
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Fri Sep 20, 2013 1:17 pm

Quoting DTW2HYD (Reply 44):

ICAO/FAA findings are related to maintenance of General Aviation Aircraft mainly charter/corporate jets flying out of country. DGCA agreed to impose restrictions charter/corporate jets. Nothing to do with commercial aviation.

Source? This is clearly not what is stated in the articles linked by me and others. Those articles clearly mention commercial airlines and aircraft operations.

[Edited 2013-09-20 06:19:19]
 
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Fri Sep 20, 2013 1:30 pm

Quoting DTW2HYD (Reply 46):
Source?http://articles.timesofindia.indiati...india/41436121_1_flights-icao-dgca
http://articles.timesofindia.indiati...tandards-charter-aviation-watchdog
http://articles.timesofindia.indiati...india

I hope you realize that this is a completely different issue from the ICAO blacklist and FAA audit findings issue, and in fact is another HUGE blackeye for the DGCA and Indian civil aviation. It is even more clear now why Japan is not comfortable. And I don't blame them at all.

[Edited 2013-09-20 06:31:24]
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 2980
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Fri Sep 20, 2013 1:40 pm

Quoting sankaps (Reply 47):
I hope you realize that this is a completely different issue from the ICAO blacklist and FAA audit findings issue, and in fact is another HUGE blackeye for the DGCA and Indian civil aviation. It is even more clear now why Japan is not comfortable. And I don't blame them at all.

Granted you have different take on everything, based on following excerpts from news articles does it look like different issue.

"The United Nations' aviation watchdog has raised a safety alarm over charter aircraft operations in India. The Montreal-based International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has issued "significant safety concerns" over aircraft charter operations in India."

"Eon Aviation, whose planes were hired by the country's top politicians and high net worth individuals, was among the four companies examined last week by the DGCA and International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). This was a part of the ICAO audit of the DGCA after the former had raised two significant safety concerns (SSC) on Indian aviation."
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: India Rejects Japan's Request For Safety Audit

Fri Sep 20, 2013 1:57 pm

Quoting DTW2HYD (Reply 48):
Granted you have different take on everything, based on following excerpts from news articles does it look like different issue.

I think you are tying yourself up in knots. It is a matter of simple reading comprehension. It is pretty clear from the other linked articles (that I don't think you have bothered to read) that the ICAO and FAA audits involved scheduled airline operations, and the blacklist India was on included scheduled airline operations. There is NO way anyone with any comprehension skills can deny that.

Now EITHER separately OR in addition, there are issues that were found relating to charter / non-scheduled operations that you have pointed out. Makes the story even worse for the DGCA and Indian civil aviation oversight, does it not? How can anyone, even you, try to continue to spin that?

But seriously, I should not waste my time arguing with someone who recently referred to Qantas as a "paper airline" compared to Air India which is a "real airline". It is a parallel reality you appear to live in.

[Edited 2013-09-20 06:58:26]