Category Archives: Uncategorized

Most Wanted List Progress Report: Aviation Safety

By Member Earl F. Weener

The NTSB is releasing a series of blogs highlighting the progress the transportation community is making in each mode to advance issues on our 2017-2018 Most Wanted List. This series sheds light on the progress made and what needs to be done going forward to improve transportation safety. This is the third blog of the series.  

DSC02888 copy
Member Earl Weener and John DeLisi, Director, NTSB Office of Aviation Safety, talk with attendees during the aviation session of the Most Wanted List midpoint meeting

Aviation is one of the safest forms of transportation—largely due to government-industry collaboration efforts such as the Commercial Aviation Safety Team and the General Aviation Joint Steering Committee. We have seen no passenger fatality in the domestic operation of a U.S. airline (Part 121) since 2009, and the accident rate is trending slightly downward in General Aviation-GA (Part 91 and Part 125). While we celebrate the safety gains made across the commercial aviation industry, there is still work to be done across all sectors, especially in GA.

On November 15, the NTSB brought together government, industry, and advocacy representatives from the transportation safety community to get a progress report on our Most Wanted List (MWL) of transportation safety improvements. Aviation Safety Director John DeLisi and I led the aviation portion of the discussion.

 

 

We learned that industry is taking the lead to improve safety, and, while some Federal Aviation Administration initiatives have been helpful, more may be needed. Yet the best path to getting NTSB recommendations adopted, most agreed, was encouraging a more aggressive voluntary, collaborative approach to safety.

Our focus on preventing Loss of Control (LOC) In Flight in General Aviation (GA)—the only aviation-specific issue on the MWL—was the primary focus of our conversations. Successfully resolving this problem requires continuing collaboration, which, so far, appears to be occurring widely and effectively. The GAJSC is one organization helping to facilitate this collaborative approach. At the mid-point meeting, we also announced that the NTSB will be collaborating with the FAA, industry associations, flight schools, technology manufacturers, and others in an upcoming April 24, 2018, roundtable on LOC solutions. The number of LOC and fatal LOC accidents are both trending down as of 2016, our last complete year of data. We won’t call that progress yet, but we might look back one day and say that it was.

The changes to Part 23 of the Federal Aviation Regulations reforming small aircraft certification standards have enabled streamlined adoption and installation of new technologies, such as AOA indicators that would prevent LOC, without a lengthy and costly supplemental FAA flight certification. Private industry can now do what it does best: innovate.

We also discussed another MWL issue, Expand Recorder Use to Enhance Safety. In particular, the NTSB would like to see more cockpit cameras, which aid in accident investigations and provide useful data for developing policies/procedures to prevent accidents. However, privacy issues, data protection challenges, and fears of punitive actions by companies appear to still hinder progress in this area.

Just as we have seen tremendous benefits in crash survivability on our highways with the use of seat belts and air bags, the aviation community so too must also recognize the significant safety benefits of enhanced occupant protection systems, such as five-point shoulder harnesses. While helicopter pilots appear to be buckling up, others in GA are not—including passengers. Child restraint systems (“car seats”) should also be used in planes; yet, they widely are not. The NTSB reported at this meeting that we are collecting more data on if/how seat belts are used in our accident investigations.

Progress is being made on the carriage of lithium-ion (LI) batteries. Heat from one battery can propagate to nearby batteries before a fire breaks out, introducing a challenge for fire detection and suppression. However, we expect the FAA to complete testing related to this risk within this MWL cycle. We also await the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration actions to harmonize its regulations with the International Civil Aviation Organization’s technical instructions regarding segregating lithium batteries carried as air cargo from other flammable cargo.

Just before the beginning of this MWL cycle, in 2016, the new flight and duty regulation went into effect, a huge win for managing fatigue in commercial aviation. We continue to fight for the small wins. We still need to apply the same level of safety to cargo flights, but we have seen progress toward applying it to maintenance personnel.

And, in 2017, the FAA communicated that they’ll research the prevalence of impairing drug use – OTC, illicit, and prescription – throughout aviation. Previously, we had studied their presence in pilots in fatal accidents, which revealed an alarming rate of OTC use in fatal accidents. It may be too early to discuss any changes to medical fitness in aviation due to BasicMed. However, one of the related concerns is the loss of flight time data that we previously gathered as part of the medical certification process.

After our progress report meeting, I felt optimistic that the improvements being made, especially by industry, will serve to make aviation even safer. I encourage all stakeholders and the general flying public to consider areas where we still need to make progress. Everyone has a role to play in improving aviation safety—whether you are a pilot, an operator, or sitting in the seats.

The Invaluable Service of Air Tankers

By Jeff Marcus and Clint Crookshanks

One enduring image of the fight against forest fires, like those that devastated California last year, is of a large airplane flying low and dropping red fire retardant. These firefighting air tankers are invaluable, and they operate in extreme environments.

2016 Pilot Fire Image by Cy Phenice
2016 Pilot Fire Image by Cy Phenice

Over the years, we’ve investigated several accidents involving firefighting aircraft, identifying issues and making recommendations to ensure the safety of these important assets. For example, in 1994, we investigated an accident in which a retired Air Force Lockheed C-130A Hercules, which had been converted into a firefighting airplane and was under contract to the US Forest Service (USFS), crashed while battling a fire in the Tehachapi Mountains near Pearblossom, California, killing all three flight crewmembers. In June 2002, another retired Air Force Lockheed C-130A Hercules, also converted into a firefighting aircraft and under contract to the USFS, crashed while dropping fire retardant near Walker, California, killing the three flight crewmembers onboard. Just a month later, a retired Navy Consolidated Vultee P4Y-2 Privateer, again under contract to the USFS to fight forest fires, crashed while maneuvering to deliver fire retardant near Estes Park, Colorado, killing both flight crewmembers. We determined that the probable cause in each of these accidents was in‑flight structural failure due to fatigue cracking in the wings, and we concluded that maintenance procedures had been inadequate to detect the cracking.

Firefighting operations inherently involve frequent and high-magnitude low-level maneuvers with high acceleration loads and high levels of atmospheric turbulence. A 1974 NASA study found that, at that time, firefighting airplanes experienced maneuver load factors between 2.0 and 2.4—almost a thousand times more than those of aircraft flown as airliners. The NASA study concluded that, because the maneuver loading in firefighting airplanes was so severe relative to the design loads, the aircraft should be expected to have a shortened structural life. Repeated and high‑magnitude maneuvers and exposure to a turbulent environment are part of firefighting service, and these operational factors hasten fatigue cracking and increase the growth rate of cracking once it starts.

Aerial firefighting is an intrinsically high-risk operation; however, the risk of in‑flight structural failure is not an unavoidable hazard; rather, fatigue cracking and accelerated crack propagation should be addressed with thorough maintenance programs based on the missions flown. Aircraft maintenance programs, which are typically developed by airplane manufacturers, usually point out highly stressed parts that should be inspected for signs of fatigue cracking, and they give guidance on how often these parts should be inspected. When specifying a maintenance program, manufacturers typically consider the expected loads that an airplane will encounter; however, in the past, for many aircraft used in firefighting operations, very little, if any, ongoing technical and engineering support was available because the manufacturer no longer existed or did not support the airplane, or the military no longer operated that type of aircraft. The maintenance and inspection programs being used for the firefighting aircraft mentioned above did not account for the advanced age and the more severe stresses of the firefighting operating environment.

As a result of our investigations, we issued safety recommendations to the USFS to hire appropriate technical personnel to oversee their airtanker programs, improve maintenance programs for firefighting airplanes and to require its contractors to use these programs. The USFS responded promptly and effectively, substantially improving the safety of its firefighting operations. The USFS hired a team to build out its Airworthiness Branch, to lead their effort to comply with the NTSB recommendations, and with this staff of engineers and technicians made needed revisions to the contracting, oversight, and operations of the USFS program using airplanes to fight forest fires. The agency hired aircraft engineering companies that performed in‑depth stress analyses on the firefighting airplanes in operation. The results were used to improve maintenance programs by identifying parts of the aircraft structure in need of continuing inspections and proposed the time and use intervals needed between inspections to prevent fatigue cracks from developing into catastrophic structural failures. The USFS also outfitted firefighting aircraft (tankers as well as helicopters and lead aircraft) with equipment that measures and records the actual flight loads experienced while fighting forest fires, then used that data to further improve the inspection program for airplanes in use and to develop programs for new types of airplanes being introduced to fight forest fires.

Clint Crookshanks, an NTSB aviation structural engineer and aircraft accident investigator who worked on these airtanker accidents, helped the USFS review its contractors’ maintenance and inspection program documents and provided advice on how they could better address our recommendations. On November 5, 2010, the USFS issued its first iteration of a Special Mission Airworthiness Assurance Guide for Aerial Firefighting and Natural Resource Aircraft, which contained the method, schedule, and standards for ensuring the airworthiness of firefighting aircraft. The USFS has revised the guide twice since then, with the latest revision issued on November 6, 2015. The guide now includes standards for USFS aircraft contracts, which are required for all aircraft used in USFS firefighting missions, satisfying our recommendations. Since these improvements were implemented, no aircraft performing aerial firefighting missions for the USFS have experienced an in‑flight structural failure.

We continue to work with the staff at the USFS to improve the safety of firefighting flights. At the beginning of January 2018, Clint attended a meeting in Missoula, Montana, to discuss the current and future large airtankers on contract to the USFS. Our recommendations are still relevant to the USFS and its contract operators and were the basis for most of the discussion at the Missoula meeting. The current USFS contract requirements have ensured that all contractors have effective maintenance and inspection programs that account for the extreme operating environments seen in aerial firefighting. Aircraft providing aerial firefighting services contain equipment that records the loads on the aircraft and even provides an alarm in real-time when a flight’s loads may have overstressed the airplane. In addition, the data recorded is downloaded and supplied to Wichita State University for mission profile development. British Aerospace, which originally manufactured the jet powered BAe 146 and RJ-85 airplanes currently used for USFS firefighting operations, provides technical support for these airplanes’ operators. The US Air Force also provides firefighting service using C-130 airplanes equipped with a Mobile Airborne Firefighting System (MAFFS) to assist the USFS on an as needed basis. The manufacturer of the C-130, Lockheed-Martin, is working with the Air Force to continually monitor and analyze the loads on airplanes used in the firefighting mission.

 

San Bernardino, CA, Wildfire- Image by Ben Cottman
San Bernardino, CA, Wildfire Image by Ben Cottman

The importance of keeping these unique aircraft and their crews safe and functional becomes even more evident during every forest fire season. The lessons we’ve learned from our accident investigations have been used to identify needed changes that have made it possible to more reliably and safely fight forest fires from the air and protect life and land.

 

Jeff Marcus is an Aviation Transportation Safety Specialist in the NTSB Office of Safety Recommendations and Communications. Clint Crookshanks is an aviation structural engineer and aircraft accident investigator in the NTSB Office of Aviation Safety.

 

 

Most Wanted List Progress Report: Marine Safety

By Member Christopher A. Hart

 The NTSB is releasing a series of blogs highlighting the progress the transportation community is making in each mode to advance issues on our 2017–2018 Most Wanted List. This series sheds light on the progress made and what needs to be done going forward to improve transportation safety. This is the first blog of the series. 

DSC02926 copy
Member Christopher Hart and Brian Curtis, Director, NTSB Office of Marine Safety at MWL midpoint meeting.

It’s been just over a year since we released our 2017–2018 Most Wanted List (MWL) of transportation safety improvements, so we decided to check in with stakeholders on our collective progress toward addressing these important safety issues. I had the opportunity to join in the discussion with our Office of Marine Safety and representatives from the US Coast Guard (USCG), the American Pilots’ Association, and the Cruise Lines International Association, and I came away encouraged that progress is being made on the issue areas that most affect our Marine safety efforts: expanding recorder use, ending alcohol and drug impairment, requiring medical fitness, and eliminating distractions.

Expanding requirements for voyage data recorders (VDRs) remains of paramount importance to the NTSB, as underscored by the information obtained from the VDR in our recently-completed investigation of the sinking of the El Faro. We certainly appreciate the extensive and sophisticated resources that several government and non-government entities deployed to find the basketball-sized canister containing the data because it proved to be invaluable to our investigation. Operators can also use VDRs to track and monitor vessel and fleet routes, and to help them determine crew training needs. The marine representatives we spoke with at our midpoint meeting are similarly interested in moving forward with VDR requirements, especially as the technology becomes more capable, affordable, and available. We’re hopeful that our recent report on the El Faro sinking will further encourage stakeholders to take action on increasing the installation and use of VDRs.

Ending alcohol and drug impairment is another important issue that we are working with stakeholders to address. The biggest hurdle here, which we discussed at the midpoint meeting with United States Coast Guard (USCG) representatives, seems to be coordinating rulemaking between the military and civilian sectors. Civilian labor unions are reluctant to support some of the recommendations we’ve proposed, largely out of concern for the rights of their members. The USCG continues to work on this issue to coordinate and implement our recommendations aimed at addressing alcohol and drug impairment.

When our conversation turned to a related concern—requiring medical fitness—I was pleased to hear assurances that the USCG is also making progress. Since its last update, the USCG has stood up an office supporting medical fitness issues and now requires medical certificates in addition to piloting credentials.

The final marine issue we discussed at our midpoint meeting was eliminating distractions. The USCG representatives informed us that the Coast Guard has released our safety alert associated with an accident that tackles this issue (SA-059 November 2016), and it intends to continue to follow up on recommendations related to distractions.

We are always eager to hear feedback from our recommendation recipients, and this midpoint meeting was an excellent opportunity for us to make sure we fully understand the issues. We have recommendation specialists in each mode who help facilitate ongoing feedback, help with questions about our recommendation process, and discuss potential solutions.

At this 1-year mark, I’m encouraged and hopeful that we’re making progress on these important safety issues, and I look forward to seeing the NTSB and our recommendation recipients continue to work together to address them.

Travelers, Put Safety First this Holiday Season

MultiMode_banner

By Chairman Robert L. Sumwalt

At the NTSB, we’ve investigated many tragic transportation accidents that could have been prevented with some planning, forethought, and good decision making. As we mark the beginning of the holiday travel season, we want to encourage all Americans to make it their goal to arrive safely at their destinations, so we’ve boiled down some lessons we’ve learned that the traveling public can use.

By Car

Fatigue, impairment by alcohol and other drugs, and distraction continue to play major roles in highway crashes. Here’s what you can do:

  • If your holiday celebrations involve alcohol, ask a friend or family member to be your designated driver, or call a taxi or ridesharing service.
  • In a crash, seat belts (and proper child restraints) are your best protection. Always make sure that you and all your passengers are buckled up or buckled in!
  • Make sure to use the right restraint for child passengers, and be sure it’s installed correctly. If you have doubts, ask a Certified Child Passenger Safety Technician.
  • Make sure you’re well rested! A fatigued driver is just as dangerous as one impaired by alcohol or other drugs.
  • Avoid distractions. In this newly released video, survivor-advocates share their stories of personal loss—and the changes they’re working for now: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jNYECrlzGU&feature=youtube.
  • Don’t take or make calls while driving, even using a hands-free device. Set your navigation system before you start driving. If you’re traveling with others, ask them to navigate.

By Bus or Train

The NTSB has made recommendations to improve passenger rail and motorcoach operations and vehicle crashworthiness, but travelers should know what to do in an emergency.

  • Pay attention to safety briefings and know where the nearest emergency exit is. If it’s a window or roof hatch, make sure you know how to use it.
  • If you’re unsure of where the exits are or how to use them, or if you didn’t receive a safety briefing, ask your driver or the train conductor to brief you.
  • Always use restraints when they’re available!

 By Air or Sea

Airline and water travel have become incredibly safe, but these tips can help keep you and your loved ones safe in an emergency.

  • When flying, make sure that you and your traveling companions have your own seats—even children under age 2.
  • Don’t forget your child’s car seat. The label will usually tell you whether your child car seat is certified for airplane use; the owner’s manual always has this information.
  • If you don’t know the rules for using a child’s car seat on your flight, call the airline and ask what you need to know.
  • Pay close attention to the safety briefing! Airline and marine accidents have become very rare, but you and your family can be safer by being prepared.
  • Whether you’re on an airplane or a boat, know where to find the nearest flotation device.

No matter how you travel, you deserve the benefits of the lessons we’ve learned through our investigations, but you need to play an active part to take advantage of them. This holiday season, make a commitment to put safety first.

 

Why Teen Driver Safety Week Should be Every Week

By: Nicholas Worrell, Chief, NTSB Safety Advocacy Division

Driving is a privilege that gives us the freedom to go where we want, when we want, with whom we want. The benefits of driving are especially attractive to teenagers. Driving is a milestone for teens, but with great power and freedom comes great responsibility.

Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death among teenagers; more teens die in crashes than from drug/alcohol abuse, violence, or disease. In 2016, more than 3,600 teenagers died on our highways, a 4 percent increase from 2015. To address these tragic statistics, the third week of October was designated by Congress as National Teen Driver Safety Week. During this week, advocates, government agencies, communities, and educators aim to promote teen driver safety and eliminate a preventable tragic problem. Especially during this week, we all need to come together to keep simple mistakes from impacting the future of our country.

Today, the NTSB joined the National Organizations for Youth Safety (NOYS) and students from Maryland and Virginia high schools for NOYS’ Youth Interactive Traffic Safety Lab. The event provided hands-on activities for students to learn about a variety of driving safety issues—from auto maintenance and work zone navigation to distracted and impaired driving. Traffic safety experts and community leaders spoke with students about what it means to be a “responsible” driver and the very real consequences of complacency. In a pre-event press conference, NTSB’s Kris Poland, PhD; Maryland’s First Lady Yumi Hogan; Maryland Motor Vehicle Administrator Christine Nizer; and NOYS Interim Executive Director April Rai reminded teens that, while motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death for teens, these crashes are preventable. One key message to teens: you have the power to change this reality.

Students also had the opportunity to talk with NTSB investigators and safety advocates to learn about our crash investigations and the safety recommendations we’ve made to improve safety for all road users—especially our recommendations for preventing teen driving crashes and their resulting injuries and deaths.

While events like the NOYS Safety Lab helps to arm students with some of the tools needed to make the right choice, we need the help of parents, other influencing adults, school officials, local government, and community leaders to help make the biggest impact. Parents, in particular, play a critical role. They should have a meaningful discussion with their new driver about the key components of driving and the thinking behind certain driving decisions. Parents must take time to outline the risks associated with driving, such as distractions, fatigue (due either from lack of sleep or fatiguing medications), other impairments, and speeding. Sometimes, making safety a priority requires establishing new priorities in the household and a shift in “family culture.” The best way to promote safety is to practice safety and treat it seriously through education, discussion, and role modeling.

 At the NTSB, we strive every day to advocate safety in the many modes of transportation. Our Most Wanted List of transportation safety improvements is designed to address our most critical safety issues. We are successful when people engage, learn strategies to improve the lives of themselves and those around them, and execute these strategies to save lives and prevent injuries. I urge you to become an advocate—not only this week, but every week—for driving safely.

 

If you have any questions about teen driving or NTSB advocacy activities in this area, email SafetyAdvocacy@NTSB.gov. We also encourage you to follow us on Twitter @NTSB and Facebook and Instagram @NTSBgov.

 

 

International Advocacy to Prepare and Prevent

By Nicholas Worrell

I recently had the privilege of speaking in Manchester, England, at the National Safer Roads Partnerships Conference. The United Kingdom has some of the lowest road-user fatality rates in the world. While our annual vehicle miles traveled vary greatly, on a typical day, about 109 road users are killed on America’s roadways, while only 5 Britons lose their lives the same way. But, as I reminded the conference audience, even one fatality is still too many.

This was a unique opportunity to represent the NTSB because the audience was mainly British law enforcement officers, and the British tradition of “policing by consent” was tailor‑made for a prevention-focused discussion. Policing by consent means that, because most people want law and order, the goal should be to prevent crime rather than focus on punishing perpetrators. Our Safety Advocacy Division operates with much the same philosophy, working to prevent transportation accidents by encouraging stakeholders to implement the agency’s recommendations. We also explain road safety to vulnerable populations, such as young drivers, to bring lifesaving information to the traveling public, and we share our findings with colleagues.

We know that, as we face coming challenges in road safety, prevention opportunities abound. Our recent speeding study noted the value of a “safe system” approach, which depends on layers of safety in a given road environment and recognizes preventive uses of technology, such as automated speed enforcement. Our recent investigation into the fatal crash of a partially automated vehicle allowed us to consider the double-edged sword of automation. Our investigations have shown that, as vehicles rely more and more on automated sensors, they also collect more data, which should be gathered in a standard format and reported when vehicles with enabled control systems crash.

The world is changing, crash factors are changing, and our tools are changing. The data that cars themselves can provide about crashes is expanding. As I told the law enforcement officers in Manchester, the NTSB has learned that everything an accident can tell us is worth our attention. We are conscious that every safety lesson learned is worth retelling, both to spur acceptance of our recommendations and to prepare ourselves, our colleagues, and the public for the challenges of a fast-approaching future. By sharing lessons learned across borders, we improve our chances at reaching zero transportation fatalities worldwide.

 

Nicholas Worrell is Chief of the NTSB Safety Advocacy Division.

 

Lessons from Our Runway Incursion Forum

By Member Christopher Hart

On September 19 and 20, the NTSB held a Runway Incursion Forum featuring some of the industry’s foremost runway safety experts. These experts came from far and wide, and from a variety of aviation associations, companies, research organizations, government agencies, and airports. It was a very thought‑provoking event, and I believe we had the right people at the table to address an increasing trend in the most significant (Levels A and B) runway incursion events.

NTSB Runway Incursion Participants
Member Hart and NTSB staff with Runway Incursion Forum participants.

The aviation industry has proven itself to be adept at tackling challenging safety issues. In the early 1990s, the fatal commercial aviation accident rate that had been declining for several decades began to plateau. Many safety experts concluded that further reduction in the rate was unlikely because the plateaued rate was already exemplary. Nonetheless, concerned that the volume of flying was projected to double in the next 15­–20 years—and with it, if the rate remained flat, the number of airline crashes—the industry began an unprecedented voluntary collaborative safety improvement program to further reduce the accident rate. This program was called the Commercial Aviation Safety Team, or CAST. Amazingly, CAST reduced the flat fatality rate by more than 80 percent in only 10 years.

Perhaps the most difficult challenge that we are currently facing regarding runway incursions is pursuing additional remedies in the absence of an accident. The industry is frequently accused of having a “tombstone” mentality: attempting to improve safety only when there’s a major accident. I applaud the efforts of the FAA, the general aviation community, the commercial aviation industry, and the airports, along with the front-line vigilance of the pilots, air traffic controllers, and airport operators who live and breathe this issue every day, to proactively identify ways of driving down the numbers. It’s a sign of this vigilance that they came together out of our common concern about the apparent turnaround from the previous downward trend in A and B incursions.

So, what did we learn from our forum? First and foremost, the staff who organized this event recognized one of the major lessons learned from the CAST collaboration: that everyone who is involved in a problem should be involved in developing the solution. Hence, we invited pilots, air traffic controllers, airport operators, affected industry organizations, and the regulator (the FAA), as well as those who collect and analyze the data­—in other words, everyone who is involved in the problem—to discuss their perspectives on the runway incursion problem.

Each participant emphasized the need for more and better data: data to help us identify the problems, determine what caused them, develop interventions, and determine whether the interventions are accomplishing the desired result. We need to determine how to collect better data, how to analyze the data more effectively, and, pursuing the collaboration concept, how to share the data more effectively, both with peers and with other participants in the system.

Perhaps the most challenging issues that warrant better data are the human factors issues regarding human limitations and vulnerabilities, and determining how humans can interact most effectively with rapidly advancing technologies. There has been considerable progress in understanding human factors in the cockpit, and it was interesting to hear in the forum about the development of a new program that also aims to enhance our understanding of human factors issues that affect air traffic controllers.

Participants at the forum also discussed several exciting new technologies—in the cockpit, in air traffic control facilities, at airports, and in airport ground vehicles—to help increase the situational awareness of pilots, controllers, and vehicle operators. We heard of many activities by the airport community to address “hot spots,” the places on the airport surface where runway incursions are occurring most frequently. These activities include changing procedures, improving training, adding new technologies, and making major capital improvements to modify airport geometry.

NTSB Runway Incursion Forum
Member Hart leads a roundtable discussion during the Runway Incursion Forum.

Runway incursions are increasing amidst a culture that, in the last 15–20 years, has become more sensitized to their potential danger. What is needed is both site‑specific remedies (due to the uniqueness of every airport) and systemic remedies that address the system’s commonalities. Through their presentations and active participation in our forum, it became clear to me that our forum participants refuse to wait for an accident to begin making improvements.

We heard from multiple participants that about 80 percent of runway incursions involve general aviation aircraft. Although the creation of new collaboration networks, such as the General Aviation Joint Steering Committee (GAJSC), is beginning to bring general aviation stakeholders more consistently into the runway incursion prevention conversation, we learned that the effort to bring all stakeholders to the table must continue, which is a challenge because the general aviation community is very broad and multifaceted.

I am optimistic that government, airlines, airports, and others will follow up on the most important directions that we collaboratively identified in the forum, and that they will continue to develop and deploy new solutions to the complex problem of runway incursions.

The full agenda, speaker biographies and a recording of the forum are available at https://go.usa.gov/xRhpC.