download issue 76

RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 76 | July 2013

FOCUS

2

>> Exercise Red Flag Nellis – A Wingman’s Perspective >> Strengthening Safety andQuality Culture - Our QAC Story >> Gunners’ Spirit for Operational Readiness and High Safety Standards >> Technology and the Human Factor

Inside:

Issue 76Republic of Singapore Air Force Safety MagazineFOCUS

Mission Success Safety Always - Mission Success Safety Always - Mission Success Safety Always - Mission Success Safety Always - Mission Success

Mission Success Safety Always - Mission Success Safety Always - Mission Success Safety Always - Mission Success Safety Always - Mission Success

Our Stories ...

July

201

3


EDITORIAL BOARD

ChairmanCOL Aw Kwee Siong

MembersME6 Lee Lip KeeMAJ Tay Lai HuatMAJ Tay Kok AnnMAJ Alvin ChanMAJ Marcus Woo Gim ChuanCPT(DR) Magdalene LeeMs Audrey Siah Yushu

Production Crew

EditorMAJ Khoo Pak Syn

Photographer2WO Steven Goh

Layout, Design & Printed ByV&C Printers

FOCUS is published by Air Force Inspectorate, HQ RSAF, for accident prevention purpose. Use of information contained herein for purposes other than accident prevention, requires prior authorisation from AFI. The content of FOCUS are of an informative nature and should not be considered as directive or regulatory unless so stated. The opinions and views in this magazine are those expressed by the writers and do not reflect the official views of the RSAF. The contents should not be discussed with the press or anyone outside armed services establishment. Contributuons by way of articles, cartoons, sketches and photographs are welcome as are comments and criticisms.

FOCUS magazine is available on these sites:

http://webhosting.intranet.defence.gov.sg/web/AirForce/AFI/index.htm (intranet)

http://www.mindef.gov.sg/rsaf (internet)

ISO 9001:2008 BS OHSAS 18001:2007

Front Cover Image: RSAF F-16D+

FOCUS Issue 76 - July 2013

02 Foreword COL Aw Kwee Siong, Head Air Force Inspectorate

15 Winners of Safety Poster Competition 2013

21 Technology and the Human Factor MAJ Khoo Pak Syn

27 Outstanding Safety Awards

28 Safety Activities

30 Crossword Puzzle

Cont

ents

1

3 Exercise Red Flag Nellis – A Wingman’s Perspective

9 17Strengthening Safety andQuality Culture - Our QAC Story

Gunners’ Spirit for Operational Readiness and High Safety Standards

Over the years, the RSAF’s safety system has evolved to one where high standards and strong safety go hand-in-hand. Every individual, team and commander is responsible for and takes ownership of the mission outcome of which safety is a key pillar.

This issue of FOCUS is about “Our Stories…”. They are the experiences of our people and the journeys taken as they train hard to upgrade themselves, conduct operations to serve, and seek to improve the various processes and procedures in the organisation. In the first article, a junior pilot at Peace Carvin II shares his experience as a young wingman in Exercise Red Flag for the first time, and how he came to realise that high standards and attention to details are cardinal for a safe and successful outcome in a Large Force Employment. The second article shares the perspectives of several Quality Assurance Auditors

and how the RSAF’s safety and quality culture have evolved and strengthened over the years. The third article is about 160 SQN’s “Gunner’s spirit” and how it has forged the SQN to be the cohesive and high performance unit it is today. We have also included an article on technology and the human factor. As we induct advanced technologies to enhance the safety of a system, they can also increase the complexity of the system to actually make crisis situations more dangerous. The need to embrace and internalize safety in our daily operations is clear. Through these personal stories, I hope to motivate and inspire more of us to have the same passion and genuine care for the well-being of all the people around us. With the collective will and commitment from all of us, I am confident of many more success stories!

COL Aw Kwee SiongHead Air Force Inspectorate


FOCUSFOCUS

FOREWORD

Foreword

2

Peace Carvin II (PC II) is the RSAF’s longest-running fighter detachment in Continental United States (CONUS). Inaugurated in 1993, its aim was to conduct high-end fighter training and to be the benchmark for operational excellence. The squadron frequently participates in Large Force Employment (LFE) exercises such as Red Flag, Green Flag and Maple Flag. The Squadron always has a mixture of experienced aircrew at levels ranging from the seasoned Fighter Weapons Instructor to junior Operational Category pilots. In Jan 2013, I was deployed with my squadron to Nellis Air Force Base (AFB) to participate in Exercise Red Flag Nellis (RFN) 13-2.

The aim of RFN 13-2 was to enable participating aircrew to operate effectively in both day and night environments. We were to operate as part of the “Blue Forces” and perform conventional wartime roles, including offensive counter air, battlefield air interdiction, combat search and rescue, close air support and dynamic targeting. To provide Red Flag

participants with realistic combat training, the 57th Adversary Tactics Group would fly as part of the “Red Forces”.

PC II’s objective at RFN 13-2 was a litmus test of its training effectiveness and operational capability. It provided its junior aircrew valuable exposure to a multi-national LFE exercise, whilst ensuring that high operational standards and safety were not compromised. Participating in RFN 13-2 was a welcome challenge to my two-year posting. I had to be ready, as the newest mission qualified aircrew in the squadron, to meet the expectations of an operationally ready wingman. This is my story.

PREPARATIONS FOR THE EXERCISE

The preparation stage was an essential aspect of pushing a junior aircrew to the limit while ensuring a fine balance with safety. Shortly after my posting to PC II, I was required to complete a rigorous


LTA Lee Rui Liang is an Ops Category ‘C’ Pilot with over 350 hours on the F-16. He is currently undergoing upgrade training at Peace Carvin II detachment.

LTA Lee Rui Liang, Pilot, Peace Carvin II Detachment

Exercise Red Flag Nellis– A Wingman’s Perspective

3

Exer

cise

Red

Fla

g N

ellis

- A

Win

gman

’s Pe

rspe

ctiv

e

in a few planning cycles, I realized that it was the attention to details during the planning stage that led to the smooth and safe execution of the mission. Often, the success of the mission hinges on the mission commanders’ ability to develop and execute a well thought out plan to get his numerous aircraft into and out of the Area of Operations safely and expeditiously.

Thankfully, my role in the planning phase then was that of a wingman and not a mission commander. Yet, it was still an intimidating albeit an eye-opening experience. My responsibility as a wingman was to assist my flight lead to build a plan that would support the Mission Commander’s intent. I provided the back-end planning to ensure that the formation had all the relevant information necessary for mission success. These include deconflicting timings at the target area, ensuring that we would not inadvertently cross flight paths with other strike formations during the ingress and egress routings, and making sure that we had enough fuel for the trip to the target area and back. All these had to be accomplished within a compressed time. I had to be efficient, precise and familiar with the strike planning norms set by my Squadron’s Fighter Weapons Instructor and apply the principles accurately.

It was daunting, yet satisfying, to know that every detail of my mission planning would have a direct impact on the success of the mission, and the safety of my squadron mates.

Mission Qualification Test, comprising basic General Handling, Instrument Flying, Air Combat and Surface Attack flights. This was a United States Air Force (USAF) requirement for all new pilots who joined a squadron. Following that, I went through a Work-Up Training (WUT) package specific to RFN 13-2. Through the WUT, I learnt the intricacies of mission planning for a LFE, honed my Air-to-Air refueling skills and conducted Air Combat and Surface Attack missions in the midst of Electronic Warfare and Communications Jamming.

MISSION PLANNING

A typical Red Flag mission commences with the Initial Planning Conference, where the Mission Commander meets all the key personnel required for the mission: they include Intelligence, Weapons Directors, Flight Leads and Rescue support crew. At RFN 13-2, I was awed by the amount of detail a Mission Commander had to pay attention to for a mission, especially when there were more than 100 aircraft involved. Detailed planning and coordination was key to every successful mission. After participating

Detailed planning and coordination was key to every successful mission.


FOCUS

4

Exercise Red Flag Nellis - A

Wingm

an’s Perspective

Aggressors from the 57th ATG fly as Red Force during RFN.

Source: Internet


LOCAL AREA OPERATIONS

Prior to my deployment to RFN 13-2, my Squadron management would relate stories of the challenges of a simple phase of flight; departure and recovery. Imagine 100 aircraft taking-off and landing from one single airbase. The launching of the participating aircraft required everyone to be disciplined in adhering to the ground procedures and planned launch times. Missing the takeoff time in an exercise of such a scale would mean that the formation would have to abort its mission because the time window at the target area for each formation was short and numerous formations were planned to consecutively strike targets within close proximity. Any error in timing by one formation may have domino effects on the subsequent formations.

Exer

cise

Red

Fla

g N

ellis

- A

Win

gman

’s Pe

rspe

ctiv

e

everyone, ground crew and aircrew alike, were briefed to maintain vigilance whilst going about our routine checks on the flight line.

FLIGHT OPERATIONS

After going through a rigorous mission planning process, it was time to take to the skies to execute the mission commander’s plan. As a wingman participating in my first LFE, I was overwhelmed by the sheer size of the participating forces, which included the Swedish Gripens, Norwegian and Dutch F-16s, UAE’s Mirage 2000-9s,

and the USAF’s F-22 Raptors and B-52s. My role as a wingman was simple, to “stick, search

and report”. This meant that I had to follow my flight lead wherever he went, search for the adversary and report it to my flight lead. Although it seemed simple, I was feeling stressed even before we got airborne. The promulgated taxy procedures at RFN 13-2 were a stark contrast to what I was used to back in Singapore. Any non-adherence to the taxy procedures during a mass launch could result in a mission abort, as delays may potentially create an undesirable cascading effect in take-off times for the rest of the formations. I required full concentration in order not to go ‘blind’ on my flight lead or miss my take-off time.

In the air, the large 150nm by 100nm Nellis airspace was filled with fighter jets, bombers, Airborne Early Warning and Control aircraft as well as helicopters. Everywhere I looked, I could see another aircraft. I felt that I had to perform my best even in formation flying, just to avoid losing sight with my flight lead. I was warned that if I went ‘blind’, I would just have to return to base alone with my head held low and ego crushed.

It was an incredible exposure for me, to be involved in so many aspects of the missions that I could only imagine previously. My heart raced as I flew through the valleys at low levels, fought to keep up with the flight lead, defended against the adversary fighters and executed crisp defensive maneuvers against simulated Ground Based Air Defence (GBAD) systems. These GBAD systems fired smoke canisters to simulate missile launches and gave us the visual cue to defend against. After ‘fighting’ our way through tactical obstacles, I had to strike my target.

...delays may potentially create an undesirable cascading effect in take-off

times for the rest of the formations.

To avoid being the weakest link for my formation, I had to be very familiar with the local Air Traffic Control procedures. Prior to the commencement of the Exercise, we were briefed on the local area procedures to familiarize ourselves with operating out of Nellis AFB. Potential safety hazards out on the extremely busy ramps were highlighted, and


FOCUS

6

Exercise Red Flag Nellis - A

Wingm

an’s Perspective

Some of us had the opportunity to release live MK-84s and inert GBU-12s in a complex tactical scenario against targets that were constructed realistically. It was a unique opportunity for those of us who had never dropped live ordnance during an exercise. Instead of dropping bombs in an academic ‘box pattern’ in a controlled range, we were challenged with having to execute our profiles in realistic and challenging missions, fighting our way in, dropping our ordnance on target within the small Time-On-Target (TOT) window and fighting our way out. There was a wide variety of targets such as mock airfields, large and small buildings, tank columns, communication installations and missile sites. Given the small TOT window, I had to memorise the target area and be familiar with the layout in order to strike the target accurately on the first attack.

NIGHT OPERATIONS

A highlight of the exercise was when PC II conducted Low Altitude Navigation and Targeting Infra-Red for Night (LANTIRN) missions. During the exercise, PC II was the only F-16 squadron conducting LANTIRN operations. I had a fellow Cat C Weapons System

Officer (WSO(Ftr)) who was recently cleared on the LANTIRN. He flew most of the LANTIRN missions and faced similar challenges as I did during the exercise.

The challenges of LANTIRN were considerable. The aircrew had to plan a tactical route that would require them to maneuver around mountainous terrain at 500ft under the cover of darkness and attack the target utilizing Laser Guided Bombs, while defending against any simulated GBAD systems enroute to the target area. As the attack profile was meant to provide the element of surprise, the window of opportunity to find, fix and track a target was compressed. Moreover, with the aircraft being flown much lower to the ground, the perspective of the target was different from the conventional

Preparing for night operations during Red Flag Nellis.


Exer

cise

Red

Fla

g N

ellis

- A

Win

gman

’s Pe

rspe

ctiv

e

7

medium altitude profiles due to the lower grazing angle. Hence, the WSO(Ftr) needed nerves of steel to operate the system without being affected by the close proximity to the ground or the darkness. Thankfully, the aircraft’s Terrain Following Radar (TFR) system was reliable and kept the aircrew safe.

OUR LOGISTICS SUPPORT

It was on the ramps of Nellis AFB that I understood what it meant to have a world-class logistics crew. PC II’s logistic crew was led by our Senior Maintenance Officer, ME5 Yew Chi Sing. Together with his team, they strived to ensure that the serviceability of our jets remained the envy of other participating forces.

There were no sorties cancelled due to maintenance defects, and

we achieved an outstanding 100% Mission Success rate.

There were no sorties cancelled due to maintenance defects, and we achieved an outstanding 100% Mission Success rate. More importantly, I could focus on honing my flying skills and did not lose any training opportunities as a result of maintenance defects.


FOCUS Exercise Red Flag Nellis - A

Wingm

an’s Perspective

8

CONCLUSION

Exercise Red Flag 13-2 was a valuable learning experience for me, and I am glad to have been given the opportunity to participate in it. It proved to me that when a squadron worked together, our achievement would far exceed our individual capabilities. Through this exercise, I was exposed to flying in scenarios that were vastly different from the training environment that I had just graduated from not too long ago. Besides developing my capabilities, the exercise also enhanced my understanding of how operations and safety can complement each other. Mission success can be achieved without compromising safety. Likewise, the completion of challenging mission objectives without incident was a strong indicator of our operational capability and maturity as an Air Force. Even though I was the most junior pilot, I knew that I was an integral part of my squadron, and an important part of Fighter Group, Air combat Command. I had a part to play and I was set in my heart not to let them down.

View of the Heads Up Display with LANTIRN.

Source: Internet

INTRODUCTION

The RSAF’s operating environment has undergone significant changes over the last decade. The RSAF has continued to acquire and operationalise new capabilities, which include advanced aircraft platforms such as the AH-64D, S-70B, F-15SG and G-550. Besides these new capabilities, the RSAF has also transformed its organisational structure with the establishment of the Operational Commands. With the establishment of these Commands, new doctrines and operating concepts were introduced to strengthen operational effectiveness. More recently, arising from the Technical Workforce Study, the Integrated Maintenance Flight (IMF) concept was also implemented to derive better effectiveness and efficiency through the integration of first and second-line maintenance operations.As the RSAF progresses, it is important that the fundamental competencies are continually strengthened because they form the foundation from which operations are conducted safely in tandem with the development of new capabilities and doctrines. Safety is one of the fundamental competencies in the RSAF, and is achieved through nurturing a strong safety culture and compliance to the Safety and Quality Management System. In this regard, the Command’s Quality Assurance Centre (QAC) strengthens this fundamental competency by conducting audits on the SQN’s Safety Management System (SMS) and Quality Management System (QMS). QAC provides independent assessments to the commanders on the general health of their units’ safety and quality systems. Tapping on their expertise and experiences, our auditors also highlight specific areas to the commanders which processes should be tightened, to remove processes which were no longer relevant and recommend best practices to

address their specific needs. Such information helps to guide the commander to calibrate the pace of change, with due consideration to the unit’s health in safety and quality.

About QAC - APGC

QAC is the agency responsible to conduct safety and quality audits on units, disseminate safety and quality information as well as the conduct of quality trainings.

In line with the RSAF’s transformation from the First to the Third Generation Air Force, our QAC has also evolved from the era of Quality Control Centre (QCC) to QAC. In the past, the Quality Control Inspectors (QCI) focus mainly on workmanship and the audit process is heavily skewed towards maintaining quality control over each task or process. The application of “system thinking” and deep probing into other underlying issues were seldom performed.


Stre

ngth

enin

g Sa

fety

and

Qua

lity

Cult

ure

- Our

QA

C St

ory

MR Loh Weng Yew is currently the Head, Quality Assurance Centre of APGC. MR Loh holds a Bachelor of Engineering degree in Mechanical Engineering and a Master of Science degree in Management of Technology from the National University of Singapore. He has served previous tours as OC QAC SBAB and project officer for S-70B in ALD.

ME3 Tan Hood Eng is a Quality Assurance Inspector in Quality Assurance Centre (HQ APGC). He is trained as a Lead Auditor in ISO 9001:2008 Quality Management System (QMS). He holds a Bachelor in Occupational Safety and Health from University of Newcastle (Australia).

Mr Loh Weng Yew, Head Quality Assurance Centre, HQ APGCME3 Tan Hood Eng, Quality Assurance Inspector, HQ APGC

Strengthening Safety andQuality Culture - Our QAC Story

The QCI were performing the roles of a “policeman” looking for faults. Besides these, the QCI were also involved in many other functions, which include defect investigations, activation of ad-hoc fire drill and processing of logistics orders and engineering documents such as Special Technical Instructions. In 1996, the previous QC concept was changed to a Quality Assurance (QA) concept, and QAC was re-certified with ISO 9000 Quality Management System (QMS). The approach to the conduct of audits shifted from that of “Quality Policemen” to “Quality Advisor”, nurturing and coaching units’ quality appointment holders to understand the requirements and to implement a robust safety and quality system in their units.

The various airbases’ QCC became the QAC in 1995, and were eventually merged to form the Command’s QAC in 2008. With this change, our Command QAC is able to streamline the unit’s safety and quality processes and assessments across the four airbases in compliance with existing orders and directives promulgated by the Air Engineering and Logistics Department (AELD) and Air Force Inspectorate (AFI).

OUR PEOPLE

QAC APGC has a diverse group of personnel in terms of seniority as well as working experiences from the different aircraft platforms and trades. They range from the senior QAI, who had previously worked

“The current audit dimension has developed with more coverage and depth not seen previously. We are

engaging more extensively with people, procedures and processes, and it is much easier to identify unique mode of operations, propose standardisation of practices within each functional area.”

– ME6 Lim Choon Peng, Hd LB, HQ APGC


FOCUS Strengthening Safety and Quality Culture - O

ur QA

C Story

10

with the Hunter and Skyhawk fighters, to the more junior servicemen who are trained on the AH-64D, S-70B, F-15SG and G-550 platforms. One of our QAIs, ME3 Chan Eng Seng recalls experiencing a shift in perception:

ME3 Chan Eng Seng,QAI QAC, HQ APGC:

“During the early days (1980s) when I was a junior technician, I saw many seniors from various trades get the job done based on the knowledge and experience which they accumulated over the years. They did not see the need to follow the procedures stated in the Technical Manuals.

Back then, the “Just Do It” culture was contagious. The majority of the juniors did not dare to speak up or probe even though they saw deviations occurring, usually thinking that senior guys knew best what to do. On-Job-Training (OJT) was conducted without an official OJT book and the completion of tasks were rarely tracked or recorded. With personal ego and peer pressure getting in the way, many avoided questioning unsound practices, unsafe acts and conditions and ‘just did it’. I adopted the same mind-set and almost got myself injured during one of the maintenance activities.

In the past, auditors were seldom treated with respect. As a junior staff, I was taught to raise the alarm whenever an auditor was spotted within the

vicinity to warn others of their unwanted presence. My attitude towards audits had resulted in many missed opportunities to bring improvement to the work processes in my work place. I only realized it when I was posted to the Quality Community. Suddenly, I had a “taste of my own medicine”, and now was at the receiving end. Fortunately, most of the unit personnel that I have interacted with were more professional than I was back then and they fully appreciated the intent of my audits.

I feel assured with a great sense of satisfaction whenever units improve their work procedures as a result of the gap identified during audits. It spurred me on whenever the unit personnel thanked me for helping them to improve their processes. Once, I re-visited the same organization and one of the engineers actually remembered me and came up to thank me for my audit finding that prevented a potential problem from arising. Such appreciation and kind gesture motivate us further in our continual improvement efforts.”


I feel assured with a great sense of satisfaction whenever units improve

their work procedures as a result of the gap identified during audits.

Stre

ngth

enin

g Sa

fety

and

Qua

lity

Cult

ure

- Our

QA

C St

ory

AUDITORS @ WORK

Our QAI performs regular audits on the units’ work processes. During such audits, our QAI review work processes, training and authorisation, availability of resources such as publications, tools, vehicles and facilities, clarity of technical instructions and publications. Our QAIs, ME3 Khoo Kian Seong and Mr Nachiappan Singaram shared about their experience in strengthening the units’ safety and quality system:

ME3 Khoo Kian Seong,QAI QAC, HQ APGC:

“Prior to the G-550’s Full Operational Capability (FOC), QAC carried out audits on process validation. The audit included the assessment of the unit’s Standard Operating Procedures and maintenance manuals to determine whether the procedures and processes

were logical, relevant and practical. In one of these audits, there was a finding whereby the correct type of hydraulic fluid to be used on a new hydraulic mill

was not clearly identified at the filler point. This mill was introduced into the RSAF’s inventory in conjunction with the acquisition of G-550. It uses “Skydrol”, a Type IV Phosphate Ester based hydraulic fluid, instead of the usual synthetic hydro-carbon based hydraulic fluid, used in our other hydraulic mills. This finding was immediately addressed by stencilling the exact type of hydraulic fluid to be used on the hydraulic mills. Accidental contaminations of aircraft hydraulic system leading to adverse effect on the seals and reduction in fire resistance were thus prevented. Safety gap stoppers such as this, help to “break the chain” and prevent any “unsafe condition” from surfacing.”

Mr Nachiappan SingaramDTO QAC, HQ APGC:

“The operation and management of our Jet Fuel Stations (JFS) are outsourced to commercial companies. When the contract for JFS was handed over to a new contractor in the late 1990s, QAC conducted a work process audit and


FOCUS

12

Strengthening Safety and Quality Culture - O

ur QA

C Story

discovered that the new contractor did not have a manual for operating the control console for the automated fuel distribution system. The operation manual was developed by the previous contractor because there was no operation manual available when they took over the system from the builder more than 10 years ago. With the termination of the contract, the previous contractor had withdrawn the operation manual that the company had previously developed for their operation. As a follow-up, the unit that was responsible for the JFS worked with the new contractor to develop an operation manual for the control console. The operation manual was registered as part of the RSAF technical publications for use. The audit revealed a lapse in the contract handover between the affected unit and the contractors. The affected unit has since followed through with the corrective actions and a subsequent audit by QAC validated that the appropriate corrective actions had been taken.”

ENGAGEMENT WITH STAKEHOLDERS

The organisational culture affects how the unit’s management and personnel think, act and work. To aid in the inculcation of a strong safety and quality culture within a unit, it is important for QAC to engage the unit stakeholders constructively to present the findings, best practices and recommendations. Management emphasis and commitment towards building a strong safety and quality culture is the key factor for success. In this regard, QAC has strengthened the engagement with the stakeholders through the following initiatives:

Engaging the unit management. Prior to 2011, all audit matters were discussed and deliberated between Hd QAC and the Officer Commanding of the audited work centre. This approach was changed along with the introduction of the Command’s Quality and Standards Audit Program (Q&S). Since then, visits by the QAC audit team have been more structured, with the introduction of the in-brief and out-brief meetings. During the in-brief meeting, Hd QAC, APGC would introduce the members of the audit teams and the scope of the audits to the SQN’s management. During the out-brief meeting, the audit team would present the consolidated results of the audited unit (compared to their previous audits), significant findings and recommendations. This meeting is co-chaired by the SQN Commanding Officer and Head Logistics Branch (HD LB). The HQ APGC functional Branch Heads would also attend the out-brief meeting for the respective Airbase

Civil Engineering SQNs, Force Protection SQNs and Control SQNs to give their inputs or advice. The audit reports would be disseminated accordingly after all the findings have been deliberated and finalised. At the Command level, QAC also prepares an executive report on the performance of APGC units for

submission to the Commander’s Conference for their 6-monthly review.

Engaging the unit personnel. Through active engagement with the units during audits, QAC has helped the units’ safety and quality appointment holders to better understand the requirements and to institute a robust system to manage their elements. QAC also provides the means to support unit personnel through the dissemination of safety and quality information through the following initiatives:


Management emphasis and commitment in building

a strong safety and quality cultureis the key factor for success.

Stre

ngth

enin

g Sa

fety

and

Qua

lity

Cult

ure

- Our

QA

C St

ory

• 6 Monthly Quality Facilitator Conference This conference is attended by the unit Quality Facilitator

and Element I/C. Issues on safety and quality are presented along with the findings, lessons learnt and best practices detected during audits.

• QAC Knowledge Portal A website which publishes a compilation of findings,

identification of root causes, causal factors and lessons learnt. Other useful resources such as the Code of Practice (CP) and Singapore Standards (SS) are also included in the QAC website. Users may also engage QAC directly to seek clarifications on safety and quality related matters through the “Ask QAC” blogs.

• e-Newsletter “The Actualiser” (right) An in-house quarterly publication that share findings, audit

trends and reviews of events associated with Safety and Quality issues.

• Safety and Quality Notices Safety and Quality notices and critical issues encountered

during audits are disseminated to create awareness.

CONCLUSION

As the RSAF forges ahead to operationalise its 3rd Generation capabilities, changes in the operating environment must be expected at all levels. Our ground commanders will need to understand and maintain a strong awareness of the on-going operations as new concepts, processes and procedures are introduced into the system. The strengthening of the unit’s Safety and Quality culture would help to ensure the safe and effective conduct of operations amidst the on-going changes. In this regard, QAC plays an essential role by providing an independent assessment of the unit’s health and providing the necessary assistance to help the units maintain and improve on their safety and quality management systems.


FOCUS

14

Strengthening Safety and Quality Culture - O

ur QA

C Story

2nd prizeME2 Muk Koon CheeAMC, ADOC

1st prize1SG Cecilia Li Zhao Xuan163 SQN, ADOC

3rd prizeME3 Chan Eng Seng

QAC, HQ APGC

RSAF SAFETY POSTERCOMPETITION 2013


Safe

ty P

oste

r Com

peti

tion

Merit 2ME2 Tay Yee Ming

149 SQN, ACC

3rd prizeME3 Chan Eng Seng

QAC, HQ APGC

Merit 1ME2 Vijayandren S/O Suppiah

HQ ACC

RSAF SAFETY POSTERCOMPETITION 2013


FOCUS

16

Safety Poster Competition

MAJ Jason Huang Song Heng is the S3 and Unit Safety Officer in 160 SQN. He has held the safety appointment since 2011, and was also awarded the “Best Unit Safety Officer” award at the Command level in WY 12/13.

MAJ Jason Huang Song Heng , 160 SQN

Gunners’ Spirit for Operational Readiness and High Safety

Standards

Introduction

“... the cornerstone of our success as an Air Force has been our strong culture. Our culture is the ballast that will determine the performance of future generations of airmen as they face the unknown challenges of the future.” - MG Ng Chee Meng, Feb 2013.

Safety has been an integral part of our success as an Air Force. We have learnt the lessons from the A4 crisis and have built a strong Air Force culture with Safety as one of our core values since 1993. Together with the culture of high standards, a virtuous cycle of commitment to safety and achieving mission success is firmly embedded in the RSAF. It is no different in 160 SQN, as the Gunners of 160 SQN continue to achieve mission success for the past 43 years of operations.

Operations in 160 SQN

160 SQN operates the 35mm Anti Aircraft guns systems and Giraffe Agile Multiple Beam (AMB) radar system. Its mission is to provide low level air defence and Low Level Air Surveillance as part of Singapore’s air defence umbrella. Founded in 1 Jun 1970, it is one of the oldest RSAF units. The SQN has participated in numerous multi-lateral exercises such as EX COPE TIGER, Bersama Lima series and overseas live-firing in Australia. Both the 35mm Guns and AMB are common features in static displays such as the national runway cycling and NS45 event in 2012. 160 SQN has an illustrious history of being awarded the Best GBAD unit 13 times in its 43 years of operations. 160 SQN’s motto is ‘Alert Always’ – signifying the vigilant and ready state of the unit to achieve mission success and safety always under all circumstances. All these were achieved with 80% of the SQN strength comprising NSmen. The key to our success is the “Gunners’ Spirit.”

Gunners in 160 SQN – Active and NS alike

160 SQN has a very strong community of NSmen who are competent professionals, committed to the SQN’s mission. They embody the SQN culture or the Gunners’ Spirit that is imbued in them from their active days as regulars or NSF. With Gunners’ Spirit as the foundation, the SQN has built a strong safety culture that is shared by all. This was attained over the years through demanding high operational standards while building a strong and resilient safety culture.

Strong Identity and Active-NS Integration

The SQN has built a strong identity over the past 43 years and has become a rallying point for its people. The association to the 160 SQN identity motivates individuals to be professionals who are strong in foundation, committed to the mission and willing to go the extra mile to ensure that operational capability stays sharp and honed. To achieve that, it requires the integration of active personnel and their


Gun

ners

’ Spi

rit f

or O

pera

tion

al R

eadi

ness

and

Hig

h Sa

fety

Sta

ndar

ds

On the other hand, the SQN’s leadership makes the effort to communicate with these NS key appointment holders. They are kept abreast of the latest developments in the SQN, asked to give feedback to initiatives and their observations on training standards. Our NSmen were also tasked to organise cohesion and social events such as Chinese New Year dinner and SQN anniversaries. Most importantly, the SQN leadership demands from our NS Gunners the same high standards that are demanded of our active Gunners.

Demanding High Standards

The demand for standards within the SQN is unwavering. The active and NS personnel have been trained to discharge their duties to the best of their abilities. Standards are communicated clearly to the ground by the commanders and the same rules apply to both active and NS training or operation manning. This is possible through a healthy reinforcing loop between active and NS personnel; management and operators. For example, the SQN manager sets the goals while their NS-counterparts support and reinforce them and communicate them further to the NSmen operators. Similarly, the NSmen operators also challenge the active operators in order to spur them to higher standards. Their past experiences provide valuable lessons for our young NSF operators to learn from previous mistakes and not having to re-learn them.

Building a Strong and Resilient Safety Culture

While the SQN continuously strives towards achieving professional excellence and operational readiness, there have been safety-related incidents and accidents. However, the lessons learnt from these

NS-counterparts into a common identity that both distinct groups in the SQN can relate to.

In having one common identity, the SQN is better prepared to hone its operational capability, overcome difficulties and put in place the methods and procedures to improve on its existing paradigms. The SQN will be able to demand more from its people, active and NS alike, in maintaining high standards. The SQN can then strive to achieve an enduring culture revolving around high standards and safety. What then is the formulae to ensure an enduring culture of excellence and cohesion amongst its active personnel and their NS-counterpart? How can both continue to have the sense of belonging and continue to spur each other to demand and achieve more?

Leadership Emphasis

160 SQN’s NS key appointment holders, who are also leaders of the NS Alumni, actively engage and interact with the SQN’s active personnel. They are instrumental in encouraging the NSmen to remain committed and competent even after leaving the SQN. They always report back early for In-Camp Training (ICT) call-ups to do the planning and prepare themselves to train the rest of the NSmen operators coming in for exercise or peacetime operational manning. Beyond contributing to mission success, our NS key appointment holders make time to interact with newly posted-in regulars and NSFs to start immersing them in the Gunners’ Spirit.


FOCUS

18

Gunners’ Spirit for O

perational Readiness and High Safety Standards

incidents have motivated its management to build a strong and resilient safety culture. Over the years, the SQN has developed a robust system of knowledge sharing in operations and safety management.

Firstly, incident reports and updates on training directives are disseminated expeditiously through the daily operations brief. Secondly, the SQN has an open reporting system through SMS or written messages so that its people can surface information upwards quickly. For example, earlier this year, a group of servicemen saw an aluminium plate dropping from the top of our hangar doors. Their timely reporting enabled the SQN management to take immediate action to remove all the aluminium plates in the hangar. Thirdly, the SQN adopted the Active Learning Process (ALP) and rigorously implemented the ‘Before, During and Post’ action reviews for all its activities. The conducting officer will compile all the lessons on standards and safety to share with the whole SQN. These lessons are also shared with the NSmen during their ICT. The SQN feels that it is important for both active and NS Gunners

to contribute to operations and safety standards through reflection and sharing. This contributes to the improvement of our training methodology, operations and safety templates.

Enforcement and Education

With strong leadership emphasis, the demand for high standards has complemented well with the effort in building a culture for safety. This is enabled by the twin pillars of success – Enforcement and Education. The SQN instituted a strong system of supervision and regulation, to ensure that things are implemented according to higher management’s guidance. To provide the necessary enforcement on operations and training, routine and spot checks are put in place. However, a strong system of enforcement is not just about how holistic the methods and system are. It also depends very much on how each and every one of our people take ownership and responsibility for conducting operations safely and professionally. In 160 SQN, various departments and teams check each other’s work area. This is in line with our belief of demanding high standards and promoting a sense of ownership. Hence, the enforcement for a strong safety culture is critical to ensure that man, being the last denominator, will not weaken our systems and processes.


Gun

ners

’ Spi

rit f

or O

pera

tion

al R

eadi

ness

and

Hig

h Sa

fety

Sta

ndar

ds

Education is the other critical area, particularly for our young NSFs who are as young as 18 years of age to appreciate the importance of safety. Education continues to be important even for our seasoned NSmen operators to get in tune with the safety mindset as they only play their role in operations once a year during ICT. Safety education cannot be done in a vacuum and it is always contextualised to the need to achieve mission success. This can be done through explaining the rationale of a safe and smooth execution being critical to achieving mission success. In addition, the SQN also works closely with AFTC to imbue good safety awareness in Type Competencies knowledge and skills training.

The SQN leverages on the RSAF Safety Day (RSD) as a ‘down tools day’ to conduct its safety education. The SQN places emphasis on RSD and dedicate a half day program covering command focus, sharing and

We, Gunners of 160 SQN, Pledge thatWe will always deliver our duties

Professionally and SafelyFor our families,For our friends,

And for the Nation.Alert Always!

learning on past incidents, Human Error Accident Reduction Training programme and topical briefs from external agencies (such as Traffic Police and NEA). Since workyear 11/12, the SQN has reduced human factor-related incidents and GAIRs by half. We will continue to improve the conduct of the RSD program to suit the requirements of SQN’s operations.

Conclusion

Focusing exclusively on safety does not address how to be effective. Focusing on effectiveness alone without due consideration to safety is reckless. While it is necessary at times to take calculated risks to push the envelope, the key to maintaining operational readiness is to embrace safety in our operations. In 160 SQN, we believe that the commitment to safety and achieving mission success are mutually supportive. Our demands for high standards complement our efforts to build a strong safety culture. The Gunners of 160 SQN start off each working day at first parade reciting the safety pledge that succinctly encapsulates this belief:


FOCUS

20

Gunners’ Spirit for O

perational Readiness and High Safety Standards

MAJ Khoo flies the Fokker-50 with 121 SQN, and has over 2,500 hours on the aircraft. He is currently a staff officer in Accident Prevention Branch, Air Force Inspectorate and a member of the FOCUS editorial board.

MAJ Khoo Pak Syn, AFI

Introduction

Technology has helped us in simplifying and automating repetitive, laborious or dangerous tasks, allowing the operator to focus on other issues at hand.

Today, the proliferation of technology has permeated into almost every facet of our lives, from domestic to military applications. Advanced networks and datalinks, which provide enhanced situational awareness for the modern warfighter, are already changing the way we operate and fight in the modern battlefield. All these were made possible by the advancement of computing power, miniaturization of electronics and the increasing affordability of such technologies commercially.

As systems become more reliable, the human operator may become over-reliant on technology and become complacent, to erode their fundamental

skills over time. Technology will fail us; it is only a question of when and whether we are prepared to take over when it happens. In this article, I will highlight the risks and potential impacts of technologies, and how we may better manage them.

A Potential Risk – The Human Factor

According to Weigmann and Shappell, approximately 70-80% of all civil and military aviation accidents have been attributed to human error1. Although technology has evolved exponentially by leaps and bounds over the centuries, the limitation and capacity of the human has remained largely the same throughout.

1 Scott A. Shappell, Douglas A. Wiegmann, “The Human Factors Analysis and Classification System-HFACS”, Feb 2000, DOT/FAA/AM-00/7

Technology will fail us; it is only a question of when and whether we are prepared to take over when it happens.

Figure 1

Strong

Weak

Perf

orm

ance

Low High

Arousal / Stress

Impaired performancebecause of strong anxiety

Optimal arousal/stressOptimal performance

Increasing attentionand interest

Diagram: Yerkes-Dodson Law (Stress-Performance curve)


Tech

nolo

gy a

nd th

e H

uman

Fac

tor

Technology and the Human Factor

Even as advances in technology help to assist and simplify our tasks, they inadvertently introduce a different set of challenges to address and manage. As we continually push our operators to multi-task and process ever-increasing volumes of information from a multitude of sensors, we may risk creating unintended situations, where the operator may either be saturated, misled, or confused. When that happens, situational awareness is lost, and any course of action (or inaction) selected may lead to undesirable consequences.

Arousal and Performance– The Yerkes-Dodson Law

The Yerkes-Dodson Law, developed by psychologists Robert M. Yerkes and John Dillingham Dodson in 1908, states that the performance levels for any individual requires a certain amount of stress and anxiety to be at their optimum; too little may result in complacency and inattentiveness; while too much and uncertainty and panic takes over. It is clear that although we expect the operator to be at the optimal level of arousal and performance all the time, several factors, such as workload, competency, fatigue and stress levels will cause the performance to tip in either direction of the curve.

When Technology works – The Risk of Extreme Fatigue

The introduction of modern technologies has blurred the distinction between day and night. We are now able to work much longer hours, regardless of the time of day. However, the introduction of 24/7 operations also brings about its own set of challenges and risks, such as sleep cycle disruptions and fatigue.

Sleeping through2

On 13 Feb 2007, a regular shuttle passenger flight from Honolulu to Hilo International Airport, Hawaii, overshot the airport for 26 nautical miles before turning back to land uneventfully at the destination airfield. The pilots then continued with the return leg to Honolulu before deciding to relieve themselves from further flying duties.

Investigations by the FAA revealed that both the Aircraft captain and Co-pilot had inadvertently fallen asleep at the controls halfway through their flight, which was on autopilot. Contributing factors to the incident include the Captain’s sleep apnoea resulting in chronic daytime fatigue, and the company’s scheduling, which required consecutive days of early morning flights.

With stress from fatigue present, the risk of decreased cognitive abilities and reflexes would likely interfere with the ability to make sound decisions. It would take considerably less demanding tasks as compared to a well-rested operator to severely decrease a fatigued operator’s performance levels and overwhelm him. While the RSAF has instituted allowable duty periods to manage fatigue, it is ultimately the responsibility of the unit management to manage the operations tempo and the individuals to sound out if they are fatigued.

When Technology Fails – Risk of Information overload

Advanced systems and avionics on modern aircraft have allowed pilots access to a plethora of information to monitor, control, and act on. However, the use of technology in complex systems can also be a cause of stress.

2 The Associated Press, “NTSB issues final report on ‘sleeping pilots’ case”, 4 Aug 2009, USA Today, http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/travel/flights/2009-08-04-ntsb-sleeping-pilots_N.htm

The cockpit of a modern jetliner, the 787 DreamlinerSource: Internet


FOCUS

22

Technology and the Hum

an Factor

With the level of sophistication of systems and avionics on modern aircraft, the role of the pilot has also changed. Where they were only required to fly in the past, they are now essentially a system manager on the aircraft. The pilot may be lulled into a false sense of security, and fully trust the automation to fly the aircraft. Erosion of fundamental skills may result. In the event of any catastrophic failure, the ability to fly the aircraft manually and manage the system failures concurrently could mean the difference between a safe outcome and a disaster.

Uncontained Engine Failure

On 4 Nov 2010, an uncontained engine failure on a Qantas Airbus A380 shortly after take-off from Singapore Changi Airport caused the aircraft to sustain damages to its wings, fuel, hydraulic, landing gear braking systems, as well as the wing flaps. The failure also affected the normal operation of 2 of the remaining 3 engines. In the light of the circumstances, a conscious decision was made to land in Changi as soon as possible, and the incident aircraft landed heavier and faster than normal, bursting 4 tyres in the process.

This quick succession of compounded system failures at low altitude and heavy all-up-weight could have

easily overwhelmed the aircrew, had it not been for the close coordination and combined efforts of an additional 2 experienced pilots on-board to help monitor and manage the heavy workload that ensued. Even then, it took the 5 pilots 50 minutes to complete an initial assessment of the extent of the damage3.

Inconsistent Air Sensor readings

The Air France Flight 447 accident had a very different scenario and outcome. While en-route to Paris from Brazil on 1 June 2009, the Airbus A330 aircraft lost contact with air traffic control and was later discovered to have crashed into the Atlantic Ocean. After a lengthy investigation spanning more than 3 years, due primarily to the initial lack of information and missing black box4, it was determined that the crash was ultimately caused by an aerodynamic stall, preceded by inconsistent airspeed sensor readings and later aggravated by incorrect inputs from the pilots in their attempt to recover from the stall.

While the cause of the inconsistent sensor readings was attributed to a possible blockage of the pitot tubes caused by ice formation within, the lack of training in handling stall warnings, coupled with

3 Tim Robinson, “Exclusive-Qantas QF32 From the Cockpit,” 8 Dec 2010, Aerospace Insight Blog, http://media.aerosociety.com/aerospace-insight/2010/12/08/exclusive-qantas-qf32-flight-from-the-cockpit/3410/4 Angelique Chrisafis, “Air France 447:investigators examine black boxes from 2009 crash,” 12 May 2011, The Guardian, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/12/af447-black-boxes-crash-mysteries

Close up of the damaged engine on the Qantas A380.Source: www.atsb.gov.au

Recovering parts from the ill-fated Air France Flight 447.Source: Internet


Tech

nolo

gy a

nd th

e H

uman

Fac

tor

the erroneous instruments and aural alert warnings greatly contributed to the crews’ inability to correctly analyse the situation5.

In the A380 incident, the outcome was a safe one, due largely to the experience and composure of the pilots, as well as the close coordination with several supporting agencies. Although there was high workload and risk of information overload in handling such an emergency, stress and anxiety levels were managed well, given that the emergency occurred within a relatively benign environment, with good visibility and no inclement weather within the immediate vicinity.

However, in the case of the A330 mishap, the crew could not comprehend and correlate the conflicting indications from the aircraft systems, and the

ensuing anxiety impaired their performance. The pilots’ inability to correctly assess and take control of a minor malfunction6, caused a rapidly deteriorating situation that ultimately cost the lives of 216 passengers and 12 crew.

Risk of Assumption

The modern warfighter has at his disposal a wide range of systems to provide him with comprehensive awareness of his operating environment. However, history has shown that information during armed conflicts may still be inaccurate or ambiguous at best. No matter how advanced the technology is, it cannot overcome the poor discipline and fundamental skills of the human operator, who may fail to verify or clarify information before ‘pulling the trigger’.

Lack of Coordination and Awareness, Visual misidentification7

On 14 Apr 1994, 2 F-15C Eagles, conducting operations in support of Operation Provide Comfort, detected 2 low flying targets within their vicinity. When electronic means of identification and verification of

5Louise Driscoll, “Air France 447 crash report: pilots “lacked training” to deal with stall warnings,” 29 July 2011, Terminal U, http://www.terminalu.com/travel-news/air-france-447-crash-report-pilots-lacked-training-to-deal-with-stall-warnings/13253/ Jeff Wise, “What really happened aboard Air France 447,” 6 Dec 2011, Popular Mechanics, http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/aviation/crashes/what-really-happened-aboard-air-france-447-66118776Jeff Wise, “What really happened aboard Air France 447,” 6 Dec 2011, Popular Mechanics, http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/aviation/crashes/what-really-happened-aboard-air-france-447-66118777MAJ Gen James G. Andrus, USAF, “Executive Summary UH-60 Black Hawk Helicopter Accident,” 27 May 1994, Aircraft Accident Investigation Board Report, http://archive.gao.gov/t2pbat5/149432.pdf

The F-15 pilots mistook the UH-60 Blackhawks for Mi-24 Hinds (inset)

No matter how advanced the technology is, it cannot overcomethe poor fundamental skills of the

human operator


FOCUS

24


an Factor

friendly activities with the airborne AWACS aircraft were unsuccessful, the F-15 pilots intercepted and mistakenly identified them as Iraqi Hind helicopters. The “Hinds”, which were later identified as US Army Black Hawk helicopters conducting operations for another agency, were engaged and destroyed.

Findings from the investigations revealed that there was no proper coordination between the various agencies operating within the same theatre, which led to the AWACS not being aware of all relevant activities in its area of responsibility. The incident pilots were also not proficient in identifying helicopter platforms.

Although technology can ease the workload on operators, the cases cited have shown that human errors may occur even if the technology works. Fatigue, information overload and assumptions are some of the risks that can jeopardize operational safety, just as the lack of knowledge, coordination and training can adversely affect the safe outcome of operations.

Enchanced flight displays in a B737

Human error may occur even if the technology works.


Tech

nolo

gy a

nd th

e H

uman

Fac

tor

We need to strive towards a balance between maintaining skills proficiency without being overwhelmed by technology, and losing fundamental skills due to over-reliance on technology.

Advances in technology

Extensive research has been put into the accuracy and reliability of aircraft sensors and avionics, with a common goal to enhance the safety and efficiency in operations, as well as to reduce the risk to human operators. However, such advances should be inducted with a healthy dose of caution. As the complexity of systems grows with operational requirements, the possibility of disruptions and the resultant severity of consequences will increase, even as the size for potential ‘triggering event’ decreases8. Despite the accuracy or reliability of the technology, they are only as accurate and reliable as they were originally designed for.

Training for Contingency

As we become more reliant on technology for operations, we should continue to train for and be equally, if not more conversant with contingency handling. While we do not expect the systems to fail, we must always be prepared to take over and ensure a safe outcome in the event that it does.

8Andrew Zolli, “Want to Build Resilience? Kill the Complexity”, 26 Sep 2012, HBR Blog Network, http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2012/09/want_to_build_resilience_kill_the_complexity.html

Standard Operating Procedures are usually promulgated to guide operators to handle normal and known contingency situations. However, these would not be as effective if they are not adhered to, or applied without the right understanding. Without knowing the underlying principle or context behind them, it would be difficult to ensure safe operations when faced with uncertainties and situations that fall outside the prescribed procedures or orders.

Conclusion

We can expect that more emphasis will be placed on employing the benefits of high-reliability technologies to automate or augment operational functions in the foreseeable future. Also, the role of the human combatant would inevitably lean from basic operations towards systems and information management.

We must continue to embrace the induction of new technologies, while ensuring that the fundamental skills of our people are not degraded in the process.

Advanced datalinks can help to provide improved situational awareness

Despite the accuracy or reliabilityof the technology, they are only as accurate and reliable as they were

originally designed for.


FOCUS

26


an Factor


Outstanding Safety Awards

Out

stan

ding

Saf

ety

Aw

ard

ME2 Liew Sau Kien - PC II

On 25 Jan 13, while performing a maintenance inspection on an F-16, ME2 Liew found that one of the four mounting bolts of the left hand ventral fin was protruding out. Upon further inspection, he observed that the bolt had some free play and the subsequent removal of the ventral fin showed that the bolt had sheared at the lower half. ME2 Liew’s finding was significant as a sheared mounting bolt would cause the remaining three bolts to bear additional stress loads, thereby compromising the security of the ventral fin.

In another incident on 19 Feb 13, ME2 Liew discovered that the Nose Wheel Steering (NWS) actuator on an aircraft had slightly more free play than normal. Further checks with the Aerosystem AFEs confirmed that the rod end bearing for the NWS actuator was loose. ME2 Liew’s identification of the defect helped prevent a potential aircraft incident.

ME2 Liew was awarded the Flight Maintenance Safety award at PC II, one of the 56th Fighter Wing Quarterly Safety Awards at Luke AFB.

With his strong work ethics, constant vigilance and professionalism, ME2 Liew was also awarded the RSAF Outstanding Safety Award.

On 7 Mar 13, while participating in an overseas exercise, LCP Paul discovered a warrant officer, who was resting alone in his tent, suffering from anaphylactic shock. He immediately alerted the Detachment Medical Officer, as well as the Detachment Medic.. LCP Ong remained composed and assisted with the stretcher evacuation of the casualty to the medical post. He helped to carry the intravenous fluid bags, and the transfer of medical equipment onto the ambulance for evacuation.

The severe rashes and shock suffered by the casualty would have been potentially fatal, had it not been for the swift and decisive actions of LCP Paul. His assistance in supporting the Medical staff during the emergency situation proved to be invaluable.

For his selfless actions and resourcefulness in preventing a potential tragedy, LCP Paul was awarded the Outstanding Safety Award.

LCP Paul Crosby Ong - 160 SQN


FOCUS

28

Safety Activities

ADOC Safety Forum 2013(18 April 13)

Aviation Safety Course for RBAirF(29 April - 03 May 13)

The annual ADOC Safety Forum 2013 was held in Chong Pang Camp on 18 April 2013. The Guest-of-Honour for the event was COMD ADOC, BG (then COL) Mervyn Tan. Guest speakers from the Ministry of Manpower, Aeromedical Centre, Singapore Safe Driving Centre and Civil Aviation Authority Singapore were invited to speak at the forum. The ADOC Outstanding Safety Officer and Safety Specialist, as well as the ADOC Outstanding MT Supervisor and Transport Operator awards were presented during the event. The forum concluded with a Q&A session where safety related issues from both Ops and Logs were addressed.

AFI conducted an Aviation Safety Course for the Royal Brunei Air Force (RBAirF) from 29 Apr to 3 May 13. The 5-day course was attended by 33 RBAirF officers and specialists from various flying units, medical service, and HQ RBAirF. The topics included safety management, risk management, crew resource management, Human Factors and case studies. The participants were very open and participated actively in the various discussions. They found the course to be timely and informative. The interactions and networking were most invaluable.


Safe

ty A

ctiv

itie

s

The 01/13 RSAF Safety Officers’ Course (RSOC) was conducted from 18 Jun to 02 Jul 13. A total of 30 participants, including an officer from the Army, RSN and TNI-AU, attended and successfully completed the course.

Targeted at Officers and Military Experts (ME) 4 and above, the course syllabus was designed to equip potential safety appointment holders with

AFI Safety Workshop - Heli Group(22 May 13)

RSAF Safety Officers Course - AFTC(18 Jun - 02 Jul 13)

the knowledge, tools and techniques necessary to develop and implement effective safety programmes in their respective units and work centres.

The 11-day program included the Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) module conducted by Ngee Ann Polytechnic with accreditation to the Ngee Ann Polytechnic Specialist Diploma in Workplace Safety and Health programme.


FOCUSFOCUS

Safety Crossword Puzzle

30

Safety Crossword Puzzle

• Email your answers with your Rank/Name, NRIC, Unit and Contact details to AFI (2WO Steven Goh) before 31 August 2013.

• All correct entries will be balloted and 3 winners will receive a $30 Popular Voucher each.

• The crossword puzzle is open to all RSAF personnel except personnel from AFI and the FOCUS Editorial Board.

Down1. _______ System Officer2. Jet _______ Station3. ________ Assurance Centre4. Giraffe ______ Multiple Beam Radar5. Safety _________ Competition9. ________ Engine Failure11. Active ________ Process13. In-Camp ________

Across6. Stress-Performance _______7. Detailed ________ and coordination8. Poor Fundamental _____ of the Human Operator10. ________________ With Stakeholders12. Safety ___________ System14. Sleep Cycle _______ and Fatigue15. Exercise ______ Flag16. Civil ______ Authority Singapore

FOCUS #75 CrosswordPuzzle Winner:- MS Phua Mei Jing, AFSC- ME2 Yu Hong Eng Roy, APGC- CPL Richmond Ong Zhao Da, AFTC

download issue 76

Documents