Aerial agriculture

In several studies carried out during aerial agricultural applications, a large portion of the total exposure was also seen on the hands, especially for mlxer/loaders. Peoples (15) monitored the potential dermal and Inhalation exposure of mlxer/loaders, pilots... 

Aerial Agriculture Accidents 2000-2005 The Human Factors and System Safety... 

The data supporting this chapter were drawn fiom insurance claim files of QBE Aviation, the largest underwriter of aerial agriculture operations in Australia. A retrospective analysis was carried out of reports and correspondence compiled by the insurance investigators and assessors at the time the events occurred. In addition, case managers familiar with the events were interviewed to establish as complete a description of each occurrence as possible. 

However, since the insurers claims and other data reviewed in this study contained little or no such information, an alternative method of investigating possible laterrt organizational and management systems failures was employed using an opinion survey by means of interviews (see Scheuren, 2004) of a sample of pilots with aerial agriculture experience. 

QBE Aviation s records included a total of sixty-one (61) aerial agriculture aircraft accidents that had occirrred in the period May 2002 to October 2005. However, reliable causation information was available for only 44 of those events. Records on the other 17 accidents were limited to a basic event description and detailed claims cost information for each case. 

There were also two landiug over-run acciderrts whieh resulted from pilots rttisjudging conditions and landiug with too much speed to stop before the end of tbe strip. In both cases the pilots had low time in aerial agriculture. 

As Table 11.7 shows, the two fuel exhaustion accidents appeared to have similar causation. The pilots failed to give appropriate attention to fuel management Both were low time pilots in aerial agriculture. However, there was insufficient information available to gain an understanding of why these pilots were unable to satisfactorily manage their fuel and take action to return to the airstrip before the fuel state became critical. 

A/C crashed due to fuel exhaustion (2) Skill error Failed to prioritize attenhon (on fuel) Poor supervision Pilot low aerial agriculture experience... 

It was apparent that many aerial agriculture operators had virtually no pilot standards surveillance or checking arrangements in place. Also there was veiy little recurrent pilot training taking place, in many of these operations. 

One obstacle to effective check and training was perceived to be the small size of many aerial agriculture companies. Sometimes, the pilot was a one-person-company who tried to meet all operational task requirements with a minimum of support. 

There was consensus that surveillance of actual operations by the Regulator seemed to be inconsistent at best, with some pilots being unable to recall any time the Regulator had shown interest in their activities after they had achieved their aerial agriculture endorsement. 

That aerial agriculture is a high risk activity is beyond question. The literature has many references to high accident rates in the industry in Australia and overseas (see for example ATSB (2005) and CDC (2004). Indeed, the high accident rates in aerial agriculture have been identified as a problem for many years. In 1996, the Australian... 

What then is the difference between the approaches to safety management in aerial agriculture and those other high risk, high reliance on human perfomiance industries ... 

Add to these the more recent developments such as crew resource management, real time snrveillance using quick access recorders you have the recipe that has delivered consistently high flight standards in the military and airlines for the past couple of decades. The data from the events studied and the pilot interviews in this study would suggest that aerial agriculture is yet to consistently adopt these basics. 

Ironically, most of the system safety achievements in the other industries have been through copying these methods and principles that were originally founded in aviatiom That marty of these have not yet been embraced by aerial agriculture is indeed a paradox. 

Of course, in mai indnstries, like aerial agriculture, commercial pressures and maiket realities make the task difficnlt. The economics of success can be a difficult balance in cash strapped operations. However, diligent application of system safety principles is even more important when there is pressure on the business, when operations are most vulnerable. It seems that this is particularly tme of aerial agriculture when the vagaries of seasonal work, the ups and downs of primary industry and the continual economic pressure are considered. 

However, it is clear that eoirtinued rrrairagemeitt abdieation of responsibility for safe flight operations to the aerial agriculture pilot, as seems to have often been the situation in the past, is not going to deliver the ehange in industry safely performance reqnired. 

Effective accident prevention in aerial agriculture in future clearly requires the adoption of proven aviation practioes and strong safely leadership. Like it or not, it... 

Data show that wire strikes have been the most common type of aerial agriculture accident since at least 1985 consistently accounting for about one-third of human factors related accidents. While this statistic alone suggests fundamental shortcomings in methods adopted by the industiy to address the problem in the past, more concerning is the statistic that almost all of the wire strikes involve wires that the pilot knew were there and had previously avoided, but due to a range of well-known human error conditions, such as excessive task load, distraction, fatigue, etc., the pilots failed to avoid the wires. 

However, the same short focus argument used to be put in other high accident rate domains, such as the argument in the 1960s that it wottld be too cost prohibitive to fit seat belts to all cars, or to fit rollover protection to farm tractors. Yet the solutions approach taken in those jmisdictions can also be apphed to aerial agriculture. 

Aerial agriculture needs to take a leaf from the successful airlines books if the accident rates are to be effectively and consistently stemmed. Operators rrrarragemerrt praetices must be changed to include the core systenrs safety flight starrdards practices merrtioned above, especially introduction of routine use of simrrlators for recurrent check and training. 

Aerial agriculture is yet to adopt many of the successful flight standards methods proven in other sections of the aviation indrrstry, in particular the lack of flight simulation which would enable rehearsal of critical flight sequences and safe, cost-effective pilot recurrent training. 

---