October 09 issue

RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 61
October 2009
Adapting To A Different
Operating Environment..
The Challenges To Come.
Challenges Associated With
Flight Deck Operations
Detachment At The Gulf Of Aden
contents
Issue 61 highlights the
challenges of different
operational environment.
Foreword
2
Challenges Associated With
Flight Deck Operations
8
Detachment At The Gulf Of Aden
12 A Closer Look At Motion Sickness
17 Know Your CSOs
18 Operationalising Occupational Safety & Health How To Get Started?
editorial board
23 Embarking On The Occupational Health and
Safety Assessment Series Journey Air Movement Centre
CHAIRMAN
26 Understanding Your SOP Improves DecisionMaking And Safety
COL Ng Chee Keong
MEMBERS
LTC Sudha
MAJ Denzil Titt
MAJ William Sim
MAJ (Dr.) Chua Choon Guan
28 Outstanding Safety Award
CAF Quarterly Safety Forum
Medical Updates
29 RSAF & TNI AU Safety Exchange Visit
APB Organises Human Factor Management
Workshop For Unit Management
FOCUS Quiz
CPT Khoo Pak Syn
LTA Paul Cheng
MR Edward Pang
MS Audrey Siah
PRODUCTION CREW
Editor
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. Contributions 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
MS Tan Jia Yin
Assistant / Photographer
2WO Steven Goh
Graphic Design & illustration
PublishCom (S) Pte Ltd
[internet]
Check out the new AFI website on the intranet!
2007-2-1606
OHS-2007-0179
Foreword
By COL Ng Chee Keong
Head Air Force Inspectorate
The RSAF is firmly established as a credible fighting force that is forward looking.
Both the hardware and software that make up the RSAF is well integrated and
when tested, has proven to be robust and professional. In achieving all this, safety
has not been compromised. Working alongside well co-ordinated initiatives, our
Airmen have gained confidence in the 3rd Generation RSAF. However, we must
never take our progress and achievements for granted, we need to be vigilant
and competent in all our undertakings. There have been recent HF lapses that
are preventable. Let us strive to be thinking Airmen so as to be able to achieve
our missions safely, working together towards Zero Accident.
1
RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 61
oct 09
Challenges Associated With
Flight Deck Operations
INTRODUCTION
Landing a 9-tonne helicopter on an area the size of a basketball court
may not sound too difficult a job. But picture this court rocking and
moving at 15 to 20 knots, with howling winds and heavy rains out in the
open sea whilst the nearest shore is 200 to 300nm away. Welcome to
the world of ship-borne helicopter operations.
Author
CPT Chua Kah Leong
CPT Chua Kah Leong
is currently a pilot in
126 Squadron, HELIG,
Participation Command.
He has been flying the
Super Puma for 4 years
and currently holds the
appointment of Command
LSSO. He has attended the
USAF Flight Safety Officers
Course and holds a BEng
(Hons) from the University
of Western Australia.
2
I have to admit that the scenario described above is slightly exaggerated.
Nonetheless, it is highly challenging and is only done if required. However,
in recent years, operations involving ship-borne helicopter launch and
recovery have increased steadily. With the ever-increasing demands on
modern maritime forces, it is becoming more commonplace to see relatively
small vessels being equipped with a helicopter flight deck. The latest
research and developments in technology have been incorporated into the
small flight deck, such that full launch and recovery services can be provided
for safe helicopter operations in a wide range of operational conditions.
In this article, we will look at the challenges that a crew faces when working
in such a tough environment. I will then highlight the many safety mechanisms
that have been put in place, both procedural and technological, to enable the
safe execution of ship-borne helicopter operations in today’s SAF.
WHAT CHALLENGES DO WE FACE?
The helicopter is an extremely versatile piece of machinery. It can take-off from the most confined areas and
land in extremely challenging conditions. But no deployment venue is more challenging than the ship's flight
deck environment. With operational demands inducing an increase in the involvement of aviation platforms
in the maritime theatre, the combined environmental factors from the air and sea may cause the helicopter
to operate at the limits of her flight envelope that she is not designed for. As such, it is important that we
recognise the challenges and address each and every single one of them.
The maritime environment presents a set of unique conditions and challenges to the aircrew, with most of
these occurring during the take-off and landing phases of flight. The most significant of these challenges are:
CHALLENGE
REMARKS
Obstructions and Obstacles
Unique to ship design, but include antennas, ship superstructures and any
protruding beams or support structures.
Turbulence
Caused by headwinds around the ship's superstructure that reduces aircraft
controllability.
Ship's Motion/ Oscillation
Unique to the maritime environment, which are Pitch, Roll and Heave.
Limited View
Depending on the size of the ship and its oscillation, this can result in limited
hover references for the pilot to maintain his aircraft's position.
Sea Spray
Reduces the view of the pilot
These challenges stretch the aircraft to the limits of her flight envelope. However, land-based operational
limits by and large cannot be applied to the maritime environment.
3
RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 61
oct 09
Thus, a whole new set of procedures and
operational limits have to be derived specifically for
the maritime environment. Thorough research and
flight trials have led to the development of the Ship
Helicopter Operational Limits (SHOL). The SHOL
sets the maximum safe limits in terms of helicopter
All Up Weight (AUW), relative winds and sea states,
ship motions and operating procedures for the safe
conduct of day and night ship-borne helicopter
operations.
LANDING ON AN OSCILLATING
DECK
Landing on an oscillating flight deck is not an
impossible task. The ultimate goal is to do this
SAFELY due to the many associated hazards. The
SHOL quantifies environmental conditions, thereby
setting the operating limits for the safe conduct of
helicopter–ship operations.
Out in the ocean, the ship can oscillate in 3
dimensions; namely pitch, roll and heave. While
the oscillations of the landing platform on a moving
vessel as well as its corresponding turbulences are
highly dependent on a ship's characteristics and
design, sea states are still the primary reason for
the ship’s motion. What a person might perceive
as the slightest degree of motion might potentially
be highly hazardous to helicopter operations. To
illustrate this point, we will look at the differences
between helicopter operations on land and at sea.
Sloping ground limits provide a guide on the allowable
slope gradients for the safe conduct of take-off and
landing operations on unprepared landing sites. For
land-based operations, the pilot often has the option
to adjust his aircraft to land on either a upslope,
downslope or cross-slope configuration depending
on which is the safest option. These same limits,
however, cannot be applied when the landing deck
begins to oscillate.
The deck slope aspect is of great importance
because it may result in dynamic rollover. There
are generally two situations in which a helicopter on
ground (or deck) can rollover onto its side – Static
rollover and dynamic rollover.
4
A static rollover occurs when the helicopter’s Centre
of Gravity (CG) is tilted beyond the pivoting skid or
wheel, with no power applied by the helicopter. As a
general guide, most helicopters begin to rollover at
angles exceeding 30 to 35 degrees.
A dynamic rollover, on the other hand, can occur
on a fairly shallow slope, or even on level ground if
the helicopter is mishandled. As the name implies, a
dynamic rollover take place when power is applied,
with a resulting rolling moment about a skid or
wheel beyond a critical angle. When this occurs,
a pilot’s control inputs are insufficient to arrest the
angular momentum generated, thus resulting in the
helicopter tipping over. This critical angle can be as
little as 7 degrees and varies with a helicopter’s roll
rate, gross weight and main rotor thrust.
Land-based sloping ground limits cannot be applied
to a ship because in bad sea states, the rocking
motion of the ship can quickly and easily generate
rolling moments that are beyond the aircraft’s ability
to counteract. Thus, ship pitch and roll limitations
have to be carefully derived to ensure the safe
execution of helicopter take-offs and landings. As an
example, the Super Puma’s 12-degree cross-slope
limits on land are reduced to a 5-degree roll rate on
a ship.
TECHNOLOGY
PLAY
COMES
INTO
Prior to the advent of technology, helicopters landing
on ship decks were previously secured manually,
with the deck crew 'tying' the aircraft down with
either nylon lashings or chains. In the SAF, we call
this 'chock and chain'; a process that is still practised
regularly in training and requires several minutes to
effectively secure the helicopter on deck.
To improve the safety of helicopter–ship
operations, technology has also
come into play in
the form
of an electro-optic tracking system. This track and
capture device which is also known as the Aircraft
Ship Integrated Secure and Traverse (ASIST)
system can automatically track the helicopter as it
approaches, secure it upon landing and traverse or
move the helicopter along the length of the deck.
The system utilises a computer controlled Rapid
Securing Device (RSD) to secure the aircraft on
deck via a probe on the underside of the helicopter.
Landing is still done by the pilot, but sensors
incorporated on the ship and aircraft allow for the
RSD to automatically move fore and aft along the
flight deck to maintain its position directly below the
probe. This system is able to capture and secure
the helicopter within 2 seconds of touch-down. This
greatly improves the safety of landing operations,
especially during severe weather conditions on an
oscillating deck. However, the limits in SHOL cannot
be increased when utilising the ASIST system, as it
is important to maintain the tested flight envelope in
an environment where no single piece of equipment
is immune to breakdowns.
HOW WE MOVE THE AIRCRAFT
ON DECK
Aircraft traversal/ motion, or the movement of the
helicopter from the flight deck into the hanger
and vice versa, may seem like a simple and
straightforward task. While this may hold true in
ideal environmental conditions, the ship-borne
environment requires aircraft movement to be wellplanned and coordinated, especially in heavy seas.
controls the traverse of an aircraft from the flight
deck into the hanger and vice versa. The helicopter
is secured to the flight deck throughout the duration
of such aircraft movement.
In addition, chocks and chains are used in tandem
with the ASIST system under extreme conditions
to provide additional layers of security in preventing
aircraft rollovers in the tight confines of a ship's deck
or hangar.
LANDINGS AND TAKE-OFFS IN
STRONG WINDS
Unlike land-based operations, ship-borne helicopter
take-offs and landings may occur with relative winds
from any direction as there may be times when it is
not operationally feasible to change the ship’s course
to obtain an ideal wind direction.
On land, limits for landings and take-offs in strong
winds are spelt out clearly in the flight manuals and
headwinds are preferred when possible. These
limits, unfortunately, cannot be applied to the ship
environment, where headwind around the ship's
superstructure can result in turbulent winds, that
reduce aircraft controllability and increase the power
demands required by the pilot to execute a safe takeoff and landing on the deck. As such, it is important
to know and adhere to SHOL’s relative wind limits
when operating onboard the ship.
The importance of proper securing and handling
of aircraft onboard ships cannot be overstressed.
Aircraft must be secured in a manner that prevents
uncontrolled fore and aft as well as lateral movement
because:
1) The pitch and roll of the ship caused by heavy
seas can result in the movement and collision
of aircraft, or worse, a static rollover.
2) Aircraft are parked on the flight deck and hanger
with minimal clearances between them.
The ASIST system addresses aircraft security
and traversing concerns by allowing for deck
manoeuvring to be easily conducted with no need
for ancillary equipment: The ASIST system also
Figure 1: Turbulence level above deck as a function of
relative wind1
The amount of turbulence decreases as the angle
increases to either port or starboard. The most
severe turbulences occur when heavy winds blow
1. “Helicopter-ship qualification testing – The Dutch clearance process”, R.Fang and P.J.A Booij, National
Aerospace Laboratory NLR. NLR- TP-2006-024
5
RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 61
oct 09
from straight ahead. In such conditions, pilots have
to be wary of their aircraft's power requirements
and exercise caution when conducting landings.
Where possible, the ship's course is adjusted to
prevent high headwind conditions.
The Aircraft Ship Integrated Secure and Traverse
(ASIST) system securing the helicopter upon landing.
BLADE SAILING
Blade sailing is the situation in which high winds
and a low rotor RPM result in the rotor blades
flapping up and down. However, with the necessary
conditions met, blade sailing has been known to
occur even when the helicopter blades are not
turning. This poses a danger to personnel operating
near the helicopter and may cause damage to the
helicopter itself. In particular, helicopters with a
fully-articulated main rotor system are known to be
more susceptible to blade sailing. It is important
to take the necessary precautions in preventing
blade sailing by ensuring the proper tie-down or
folding of blades when the helicopter is out on the
flight deck.
NIGHT OPERATIONS WITH
NIGHT VISION GOGGLES
At night, the open sea is one of the most
challenging operating environments for helicopter
aviators. Imagine having to take-off into absolute
darkness, where not even the most advanced
Night Vision Goggles (NVG) today can provide
the pilot a discernible horizon. When flying night
missions, a pilot sometimes has to fly at extremely
low altitudes based almost entirely on instruments
and with almost no external references.
Therefore, different envelopes are used for night
operations. Deck motion limits are lowered for
night operations due to the increased difficulty
in obtaining visual references. The difficulty for
landings at night is mainly due to the scotopic
6
vision of the human eye, resulting in reduced
visual acuity. The use of NVGs addresses
the problem but results in a 40º field of view,
impairing the judgement of approach speeds
and closure rates. Limited binocular vision
also degrades distance estimations, making
it harder for the pilot to judge the distance
between the aircraft and the superstructure.
Given the many hazards, it is important to
ensure proper crew pairing when conducting
night ship-borne operations. A general rule
that applies across the board in all aviation
domains: the more complex the mission profile
and environment are, the more senior the
aircrew should be.
FLIGHT DECK SAFETY –
GROUND CREW
Up until now, the discussions have been on
flight operations; but personnel working on
the ground (in this case - deck) similarly face
many hazards presented by the maritime
environment.
With helicopters taking off and landing, deckhands working out on the flight deck face the
dangers of being blown overboard by rotor
downwash, or being hit by the helicopter's
rotors should blade sailing occur. It is common
sense not to stand too close to an aircraft that is
taking off or landing, but operations sometimes
require a marshaller to stand just metres away
from a landing aircraft. As such, the control of
personnel movement onboard the deck at all
times is important, particularly when aircraft
are operating on the flight deck.
Personnel who work on the flight deck are
also required to don the appropriate Personal
Protective Equipment (PPE). Overalls, safety
shoes and lifejackets are examples of standard
equipment, while marshallers, chock and chain
crews and refuelling crews have specialised
equipment. Various coloured jackets are also
assigned to crew to differentiate their roles and
aid in the supervision of personnel working on
the flight deck.
As the ship sails across various latitudes, the
crew experiences a drastic change in climate.
In hot climates, temperatures on the flight deck can rise to a sweltering 45ºC. Supervisors have
to be careful in monitoring their crew for heat related injuries, such as heat fatigue, and ensure
adequate hydration measures are in place. As far as possible, major aircraft servicing should be
conducted in the hangar.
On the other hand of the spectrum, cold weather operations do not solely translate to cold temperatures.
In general, cold weather at sea also encompasses heavy seas, ice, snow, strong winds and overall
unpredictability because of the relatively rapid progress of storms and lack of reliable weather reports.
While the priority for cold weather lies in issuing warm clothing for servicemen and women, warm
clothing is bulky and reduces the speed at which personnel move. Fatigue may result from the extra
effort required to overcome the bulkiness of the clothing. Careful supervision and crew duty rotations
have to be put in place to minimise fatigue and the crew's exposure to cold weather.
FROM THE GULF OF ADEN
After a 3-month deployment in the Gulf of Aden in support of anti-piracy operations under the
Combined Task Force, the men and women from the SAF Task Group brought home many lessons
from their experiences in theatre.
For the flying crew, the hazards and dangers of operations on pitch-black nights were very real.
Illumination levels were extremely low on moonless or overcast nights. It was nearly impossible to
visually tell the difference between the sea and sky – pilots could not discern the horizon without
the aid of flight instruments. Given that helicopters usually operate at low levels below 1000 feet, the
crew had to be alert in order to prevent controlled flight into water. The use of and trust in aircraft
instruments were critical in such dark conditions.
Sea sickness has varying degrees of effect on different individuals. While some people are completely
unaffected by an oscillating ship, others become incapacitated to the point where they were unable
to perform their duties. It is important to know that even with medication, a pilot suffering from sea
sickness should never be put behind the stick under any circumstances. Similarly, members of
the ground crew should not be assigned to complex servicing jobs when they are affected by sea
sickness.
The ground crew climbs up the helicopter to perform essential servicing tasks and runs the risk of
slipping off the aircraft when it oscillates in bad sea states and high winds. With the top of the Super
Puma standing at almost 5 meters off the ground, the probability of being injured in a fall are high.
As such, ground crews were required to don a 5-point harness whenever they climb up the aircraft
for servicing.
CONCLUSION
Helicopter flight deck operations bring about their own set of hazards and challenges to both the air
and ground crews. From the oscillating deck to hot and cold weather operations, the flight deck can
be an extremely challenging place for personnel to work in. Nonetheless, with the proper measures
in place, the safe launch and recovery of helicopter operations can be conducted safely to meet the
ever increasing demands on today's modern maritime forces.
Photos courtesy of MAJ Low Kok Meng, 126 SQN
7
RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 61
oct 09
Detachment At The
Gulf Of Aden
Author
LTA Mark Yee,
Pilot, 125 SQN
LTA Mark Yee is a qualified
Super Puma helicopter pilot
in 125 SQN. He obtained
his wings in 2007, and
participated in the SAF's first
anti-piracy task group to the
Gulf of Aden in 2009.
As part of the contribution to the international effort against sea piracy,
the Singapore Armed Forces deployed a combined task group to the
Gulf of Aden (GoA). Other than the RSAF's two Super Pumas, the
deployment task group also comprised of a Landing Ship Tank (LST)
and Ship Boarding Teams (SBT) from the Navy and Army respectively.
Working closely with our international counterparts, the RSAF Super
Puma detachment conducted regular patrols and surveillance within
their Area of Operations (AO) from the LST, to deter and prevent piracy
in the Gulf Of Aden. Deployed from April-July 2009, this was the longest
ever deployment at sea for the Super Puma. Being the pioneering batch
for this mission, there were many considerations and preparations
needed before the deployment could commence.
Having received the green light to deploy within a short span of two
months for the mission, an intense work up training plan had to be
implemented to ensure the proficiency and safety of the aircrew during
the mission. The main bulk of the training was for flight profiles to be
flown during patrols and response plans to acts of piracy. Both table
top exercises involving contingencies handling and 'live' flying were
conducted.
Besides the work up training, there were several challenges faced by the
mission planners of this integrated set-up. Although the LST was equipped
with basic facilities (hangar space, refuelling capabilities) capable of
8
supporting helicopter operations within its limited
deck space of no more than two tennis courts, it was
not purpose-built to house a “mini SP Squadron”.
In order to support sustained helicopter operations
from the LST, a helo operations room was required.
Apart from these technical challenges, many other
potential issues were discussed and scrutinised by
all involved, to ensure the best available operational
and logistical support for the helicopter detachment
crew throughout the mission. The limited allocated
real estate for the SP detachment needed to be well
thought-out and planned, to maximise efficiency in
facilitating our operations onboard the ship.
Sailing on a LST for a prolonged period of time
is something new to us, hence one of the most
important concerns at the beginning was to find our
sea legs. The phrase “Rock my world” had taken on
a whole different meaning. To help the seemingly
never-ending churning of our stomachs while out at
sea, we were introduced to the various seasickness
remedies, such as pills and “electric shock” bands,
also known as ReliefBand. People could be seen
making their way to and fro the flight deck several
times during the deployment en route to our AO, to
get some fresh air and see the horizon to “stabilise
their gyros”1. Ultimately, what it took was time. After
a few “involuntary expulsions” and lots of rest, things
got better and by the time we arrived in-theatre, we
were able to focus on our mission at hand.
The main difference between operating on the
LST and on the ground is obvious. One platform
moves while the other does not. The operating
environment on the ship forbade loose equipment
onboard, therefore a safety brief was given by the
ship crew, prior to the commencement of operations,
to educate and remind us on the differences out at
sea. The main highlight was the heave, pitch and
roll of the ship, otherwise affectionately known as the
“rock and roll”. Due to the motion of the ship, most
of the things onboard had to be tied down to prevent
anything from accidentally toppling or falling over
and injuring the crew. With many tie down points
pitting the surface of the flight deck, the floor looked
like a mine field at some places!
The movement of the ship can make what may seem
as ordinary and harmless little things jeopardise the
safety of those in its vicinity. Extra care and attention
was put into the little actions that we often perform,
such as holding the door while moving through, as
an unexpected ship motion might send the heavy
metallic door slamming, potentially injuring the
unfortunate individual. This remains true for all
things that are done on the ship. From seemingly
mundane actions like walking around, to big scale
operations like changing the aircraft's engine, all
actions and operations require more attention
and thought process. The brief enlightened us on
operating safely on board the LST and reminded us
1. Lingo used to describe the stabilising of the otoliths in the inner ear, usually when the there is a de sync
between motions that the body perceives and corresponding visual reference (or lack of).
9
RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 61
oct 09
to have a proactive safety mindset at all times. A
suggestion box was set up to collate and address
the safety concerns of the crew to help improve
the operating procedures on board the ship where
needed.
Operating on the ship, there was a requirement for us
to be inculcated with the Navy's culture and regime.
Terms such as “pipe” or “sunday rig” were as familiar
to us as a first time tourist in China. On the LST, there
were different shifts of naval officer and specialist
combinations, called “Watches”, to constantly
man the ship throughout a twenty-four hour cycle,
whenever it was out of harbour e.g. “Alpha Watch”.
Each watch had individual roles assigned to operate
the ship and to keep a lookout for threats within
the area. Other roles included the co-ordination
and assistance towards the launch and recovery
of the helicopters.
;
Gulf of Aden
Puma in the
r
s.
e
n
p
u
tio
S
ra
e
e
p
th
of o
r on
in their area
Door gunne
ith
w
ce
n
a
ill
rve
conducting su
With many
opportunities for discussions and sharing
sessions held between the SP detachment and
Navy personnel, we grew to understand each other’s
unique terms and operating culture. As there were
several safety drills conducted for various scenarios
such as attacks on the ship, this improved the crews'
overall operational efficiency and safety awareness
on the LST,
2. Similar in functions to an Air Traffic Control Tower.
10
brushing sa
ainstakingly
An aircrew p
a mission.
aircraft after
lt off the
Launching a Super Puma helicopter
requires a fair bit of co-ordination. The Flight Deck
Officer (FDO), communicating with the Flying Coordinator (FLYCO) in the Helicopter Control Room
(HCR2), directs the marshallers on the flight deck to
signal the helicopter for take off when clearance is
given by the FLYCO. The pilots will need to ensure
three critical items during take-off and landing –
positive clearance from the FLYCO, green lights on
the flight deck (a signal that the deck is cleared for
launch), and the marshallers' signal to take-off/land.
Person
brief from
nel getting a
unterparts.
our Navy co
For the aircrew flying within the Gulf of Aden, the
threat posed by pirates is always present. The
logisticians face other challenges such as limited
aircraft, available spare parts and the harmful
environmental effects on the aircraft.
Due to the nature of the deployment, repairs and
maintenance work had to be done at sea. Major
servicing requirements, such as the replacement of
engines, were accomplished smoothly and safely,
despite the constant motion of the ship. This was a
milestone for our logisticians as it was the first time
such servicing was done on the LST.
Apart from the challenging situations, operating in
a salt-laden sea environment can be corrosive to
aircraft
Washing the
after a missi
on.
tesy of MA
Photos cour
eng, 126
J Low Kok M
SQN
the aircraft. To prevent corrosion, the logisticians
needed to implement additional maintenance
procedures such as frequent rinsing of the
aircraft. Although the working hours were long, the
logisticians rose to the challenge and the aircraft
were well maintained throughout the duration of the
mission.
In summary, our operations on board the LST
have gained us valuable experience and a deeper
insight into the culture and the working ethics of
the other services. The success of the mission
has not only showcased the ability of the 3rd
Generation SAF to operate together swiftly,
efficiently, but also safely.
11
RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 61
oct 09
A CLOSER LOOK AT
MOTION
S
E
S
N
K
C
I
S
People travelling in cars, trains, aeroplanes and boats often experience
motion sickness. Although this condition occurs fairly commonly and many
a times only a minor nuisance, highly susceptible individuals can develop
severe symptoms, making travelling less of a joy. Obviously, aviators who
succumb to the incapacitating effects of motion sickness do not possess
the best physical and mental status to pilot the aircraft, which thereby
renders them operationally maimed.
This article provides an overview to this commonly encountered “sickness”
and at the same time highlights some of the RSAF efforts to help both our
aircrew and ground crew in overcoming it.
Author
MAJ(DR) Chua Choon Guan,
SO Crew Safety, CSAFE Br,
ARMC
MAJ(DR) Chua Choon Guan
is an Aviation Medical Officer
with the Aeromedical Centre.
He has been with the ARMC
for the past 4 years and
holds an M.B.;B.S. Degree
from National University of
Singapore and Diploma in
Aviation Medicine from King's
College, UK.
Motion Sickness – A Misnomer?
Motion sickness is a generic term that encompasses various forms
of the 'sickness' named after the provocative environment or vehicle
that creates a real or apparent motion stimuli, which an individual is
unadapted to. It includes air sickness, sea sickness, car sickness,
space sickness, simulator sickness and virtual-reality sickness. Despite
the wide range of causes, they have in common basic characteristics
of the provocative stimulus as well as responses from the exposed
individual and hence, the general term 'motion sickness' is used to
refer to this group of conditions.
However, motion sickness is, in 2 main respects, a misnomer for the
conditions referred. Firstly, symptoms characteristic of 'motion sickness'
can be evoked as much by the absence of expected motion as by the
presence of unfamiliar motion. Classic examples include 'simulator
sickness' and 'cinerama sickness' where the trigger of symptoms
comes from visual motion without bodily movement. Secondly, the
word 'sickness' carries the connotation of 'affected with disease' which
12
Signs and Symptoms
Individuals experiencing motion sickness
invariably exhibit characteristic signs and
symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, pallor and
cold sweating. Typically, the development of
these signs and symptoms follows an orderly
fashion and the time scale for their occurrences
depends on 2 key factors: (1) intensity of stimulus
and (2) susceptibility of the individual.
The earliest symptom to appear is usually an
unfamiliar sensation of epigastric discomfort,
which is also commonly described as 'stomach
awareness'. This progresses to nausea, facial
pallor and cold sweating. At the same time,
individuals may experience an increased
salivation, warmth and have light-headedness.
Occasionally, hyperventilation can occur and
the individual may sigh or yawn repeatedly. If
the exposure to the motion stimuli continues,
vomiting then ensues, which provides a transient
relief of symptoms.
For those who are more susceptible to motion
sickness, this cyclical pattern, with waxing and
waning symptoms and recurrent vomiting, tend to
last for several days amidst continued
exposure to the same
motion stimuli. This may result
in the individual becoming anorexic,
dehydrated, lethargic and depressed,
thereby incapable of carrying out their normal
duties. Notably, feelings of lethargy and sleepiness
can persist for many hours after withdrawal of
the provocative motion stimulus and nausea has
subsided.
Theory Behind Motion Sickness
Based on the neural mismatch hypothesis by
Reason (Reason and Brand 1975), motion
sickness is induced when (1) there is a conflict
between the signals from the eyes, vestibular
apparatus (inner ear) and the other receptors
stimulated by the motion, and (2) that these
signals differ from those that the central nervous
system expects to receive (also referred to as
the internal model). Under the influence of such
unfamiliar motion stimulus, the internal model
is rearranged and a sequence of neural and
hormonal responses is evoked resulting in the
motion sickness signs and symptoms described
previously.
To explain the relatively slow development
of symptoms, it has been postulated that the
motion sickness pathway is mediated by a leaky
integrator – a mechanism that both accumulates
the mismatch signal and allowing it to leak away
slowly at the same time. Additionally, this leaky
integrator carries a threshold function accounting
for an individual not becoming motion sick when
the stimulus is not intense and the ability for
subsequent adaptation to the unfamiliar motion
environment. Understandably, multiple threshold
Image courtesy the Wikipedia
blurs the fundamental fact that motion sickness
is actually a normal response of a healthy person
following exposure to an unfamiliar motion of
sufficient severity and length of time. In fact,
the only people who are truly immune to 'motion
sickness' are those with impaired vestibular
system who, hence, have an underlying 'disease'
so to speak. As such, this group of motion-related
conditions should be more aptly referred to as
'motion mal-adaptation syndrome'.
Disagreement between visually perceived movement
and the vestibular system's (above) sense of movement
results in motion sickness
13
RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 61
oct 09
High
functions exist, explaining the large individual
variations in susceptibility and the extent of signs
and symptoms, which develop following exposure
to the provocative motion.
In the normal, familiar environment, inputs from the
sensory receptors coincide with the expectations
of the internal model and the individual remains
asymptomatic. However, on initial exposure to
unfamiliar motion, a large mismatch signal is
produced which triggers off the typical signs and
symptoms of motion sickness once the threshold
is exceeded. This mismatch signal decays slowly
as the internal model is updated until there is no
longer a mismatch between the information from
the sensory receptors and which is 'expected' by
the internal model. At this stage, the individual
achieves adaptation to the atypical motion
environment, and the signs and symptoms of
motion sickness disappear.
Interestingly, on return to the familiar motion
environment, a mismatch occurs initially because
the internal model is no longer appropriate, and
motion sickness may recur. The internal model
simply undergoes another modification to make
it compatible again with the sensory input. This
phase of adaptation, however, proceeds more
quickly than the initial adaptation to the atypical
environment as the sensory-internal model
correlations have been long-established by
previous experiences and are thus retrieved more
easily than newly acquired ones.
RECEPTIVITY
Low
Fast
ADAPTABILITY
Slow
High
RETENTIVITY
Low
Figure 1. Diagram illustrating three factors that determine
motion sickness susceptibility. The susceptibility to motion
sickness increases with the length of the arrow.
Receptivity refers to the way in which the
individual processes the stimulus within the
nervous system, or, in another words, the present
state of the internal model. Individuals with high
inherent responsiveness to the unfamiliar motion
stimulus transduce it more effectively than less
responsive individuals and hence have a more
intense mismatch signal and higher susceptibility
to motion sickness.
Adaptability describes the rate at which the
individual adapts to an unfamiliar motion
environment and clearly, those who adapt slowly
suffer more severe symptoms and require a longer
period for adjustment to the motion compared to
someone who adapts faster.
What determines Susceptibility
to Motion Sickness?
Whilst Receptivity and Adaptability determine how
an individual will react on first exposure to the
unfamiliar motion environment, Retentivity serves
to explain how well adaptation is retained between
exposures to the same provocative motion. Poor
retention of adaptation is illustrated by an aircrew
member who persistently experiences motion
sickness when flights are separated by several
days of ground duty but is symptom-free when
able to fly regularly with not more than one or two
days on the ground between flights. An aviator
with higher retentivity is, on the other hand, less
affected by the intensity of exposure and remains
symptom-free even when flights are sparsely
scheduled.
At least 3 factors have been recognised that
contribute to the inter-subject variability in
susceptibility to motion sickness – Receptivity,
Adaptability and Retentivity (see Figure 1).
All 3 factors are equally important when predicting
whether motion sickness is likely to be a problem
in an aviator in the long run. For instance, an
aviator with high receptivity tend to have severe
In the same vein, adaptation proceeds more
rapidly during subsequent exposures to the
atypical motion environment as the rearrangement
of the internal model is hastened with the aid of
previously retained stimulus patterns. With frequent
exposures to this specific motion environment, the
internal model modification process may be so
quick that the mismatch signal is now short-lived
or of insufficient intensity or duration to produce
motion sickness in the individual.
14
sickness on initial exposure to the unfamiliar
motion but, if the individual adapts quickly and has
good retention of adaptation, then air sickness
is unlikely to be a persistent problem. On the
contrary, an aviator with low adaptability and poor
retention is likely to continue to be affected by
sickness when exposed to the provocative motion.
Extrapolating from here, the two aviators will likely
achieve differing outcomes after undergoing a
motion sickness 'de-sensitisation' therapy.
Apart from the above factors that have been
described, certain psychological and behavioural
factors have also been noted to influence one's
susceptibility to motion sickness. Specifically,
fear and anxiety are identified as potentiators for
motion sickness. Also, it has been observed on
ships and aircraft that people who concentrate
their attention and mental effort on a task are less
likely to become sick than those who are not so
occupied.
How do we Prevent Motion
Sickness?
To avoid the debilitating effects of motion sickness,
the following measures have been suggested and
utilised.
Behavioural Measures. The fundamentals for
behavioural measures stem from elimination of
motion cue conflict as well as distraction from the
motion stimuli. Commonly advocated techniques
include restricting head movement by pressing
the head firmly against the seat or other available
support, and to look out of the window of the
moving vehicle and gaze towards the horizon
in the direction of travel. The latter, in particular,
helps to re-orientate an inner sense of balance
by providing a visual re-affirmation of motion.
Separately, one can choose to participate in some
form of activity to distract himself / herself from
the provocative motion. However, one should note
that some activities, reading for instance, may
end up accentuating discordant visual cues and
thereby counter-effective to its intent. Listening
to music and taking slow and deep breaths
(breathing technique), on the other hand, present
more feasible options for distraction in managing
motion sickness. Refer to Figure 2 for some of the
quick tips to combat motion sickness.
There are several ways you can try to prevent
motion sickness:
• Sit in the front seat in a car.
• Keep your eyes on the horizon. Don't
read.
• Rest your head against the seat back, to
keep it still.
• Turn the air vents toward your face.
• Don't smoke.
If you have motion sickness on a plane, try
these tips:
• Avoid big, greasy meals and alcohol the
night before air travel.
• Eat light meals or snacks that are low in
calories in the 24 hours before air travel.
• Avoid salty foods and dairy products
before air travel.
• Sit toward the front of the aircraft or in a
seat by the wing.
• Turn the air vent flow toward your face.
If you have motion sickness on a boat, try
these preventive measures:
• Ask for a cabin on the upper deck or
toward the front of the ship.
• When on deck, keep your eyes fixed on
the horizon or visible land.
Figure 2. Quick tips to combat motion sickness.
Adaptation and De-sensitisation Therapy. The
most effective preventive or therapeutic measure
is obviously adaptation to the provocative
motion. This is nature's own cure and is the
preferred method of preventing motion sickness,
particularly for aircrew, who should not fly under
the influence of anti-motion sickness drugs.
The basic philosophy governing the acquisition
and maintenance of protective adaptation is
that aircrew are introduced gradually to the
provocative motions of the flight environment,
and that adaptations, once achieved, should be
maintained by regular and repeated exposures to
the motion stimuli. Whilst majority of aircrew adapt
with repeated exposures, a small percentage fail
to develop sufficient protective adaptation towards
the provocative stimuli and continue to experience
motion sickness symptoms.
15
RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 61
oct 09
In the RSAF, aircrew (typically trainees)
with persistent air sickness are enrolled into
the
Systematic
Progressive
Airsickness
Desensitisation
(SPADE)
Programme,
a
ground-based motion sickness de-sensitisation
programme developed by ARMC. This Programme
comprises a 10-day period of twice-daily exposure
to cross-coupled (Coriolis) vestibular stimulation
with progressively increasing intensity in the
turntable. At the same time, aircrew are taught
biofeedback and relaxation techniques to control
the physiologic responses and allay anxiety evoked
by the motion stimuli. Majority of the aircrew with
persistent air sickness successfully complete the
Programme and resume flying training or duties
thereafter.
Medication. Numerous medicinal remedies in the
forms of tablets and trans-dermal patches are now
available in the market and can be purchased either
over-the-counter or via prescriptions. Commonly
encountered
drugs
include
Dramamine®
(dimenhydrinate),
Stugeron®
(cinnarizine),
promethazine and scopolamine. Despite the
wide range, none of the drugs has been proven
to be entirely efficacious in preventing motion
sickness and all have their own specific side effect
profiles. Most result in sedation and impairment
of performance and are thus disallowed amongst
aircrew on duty for usage to prevent motion
sickness symptoms.
However, for RSAF personnel deployed on
naval
platforms
experiencing
debilitating
symptoms of motion sickness, pharmacological
treatment using a combination of promethazine
and pseudoephedrine has been allowed as a
compromised solution in view of operational
necessity. This allows them to continue to operate
under conditions of sea sickness, where symptoms
would be sufficiently mitigated by medication to
allow safe conduct of their duties. However, the
caveat is that pilots who are on medication would
be restricted to “as / with qualified co-pilot” status
and the other pilot should not be taking antimotion sickness medication as well. Details of
the guidelines may be found in the RSAF Medical
Directives, AFMED-HC-09 “Management of
Motion Sickness for RSAF Personnel Deployed
on Naval Platforms”.
16
Figure 3. Woodside ReliefBand.
Other Preventive Measures Employed by the
RSAF. The Woodside ReliefBand (see Figure 3) is
now used by aircrew and ground crew during RSAF
shipboard deployments as a form of preventive
measure against motion sickness in an unfamiliar
motion environment. This ReliefBand is a watchlike device that is worn on the wrist and works by
emitting gentle electrical impulses directed at the
Neiguan (Pericardium 6) acupuncture point (which
corresponds with the position of the median nerve
at the wrist). It is thought that its use would prevent
or reduce the symptoms of nausea and vomiting
secondary to pregnancy, general anaesthesia and
motion sickness. The ReliefBand is simple to use
and has received regulatory clearance from the
US Food and Drug Administration for use by the
general public.
Conclusion
As iterated, motion sickness is a
natural bodily response towards
unfamiliar motion environment and
all healthy individuals can potentially
succumb to its effects depending
on the duration and severity of the
motion. Try attempting the preventive
methods the next time you travel on an
unaccustomed vehicle and you may
find yourself having a much smoother
ride than before.
Know Your CSOs
CSO, Air Combat Command –
LTC Raymond Tan
LTC Raymond Tan joined the RSAF in October 1987 and attained his
wings in June 1990. LTC Tan is a Fighter Pilot by vocation with over 3300
hours of flying experience to date. His vast amount of experience began
with the F-5E/F, followed by the F-16A/B and then back to the F-5S/T in the
year 2000. In between, LTC Tan has also completed his Instructional tour
in Flying Training School (FTS) operating the S211 at RAAF Base Pearce,
Western Australia. Prior to assuming the appointment of Command Safety
Officer – HQ ACC, LTC Tan held several staff appointments in HQ RSAF.
As a CSO, LTC Tan is responsible for developing, implementing and
enforcing safety standards and regulations under the Command's
Accident Prevention Program. In addition, he is also responsible for
providing a comprehensive safety oversight program – at the Operational
Command, Functional Group and Unit levels – consisting of certification,
inspections, audits, education and awareness, as well as enforcement
activities to ensure compliance with safety regulations.
CSO UC – MAJ Koh Hong Soon
MAJ Koh is a UAV Pilot by vocation with close to 1200 hours
of flying experience in the Scout and Searcher UAV. Prior to
assuming the appointment of Command Safety Officer – HQ UC,
he held various command positions in the ops Sqn and training
school, such as Flight Commander and Chief Instructor of UAV
Training School. His last appointment was a Staff Officer in Air
Ops Department, before assuming the Command Safety Officer
appointment. He attended the Flight Safety Officer Course by
Southern California Safety Institute in 1995.
As CSO, he is responsible for developing, reviewing safety
regulations in the Command and implementing and enforcing
safety standards and regulations. He is also responsible to
provide a comprehensive safety oversight program consisting of
inspections, audits, education and awareness.
17
RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 61
oct 09
Operationalising
Occupational
Safety & Health–
How To Get Started ?
Author
LTC Chan Kim Hoong,
Hd ARB, APGC HQ
LTC Chan Kim Hoong is currently
Head Airfield Readiness Branch,
HQ APGC. He was formerly
the CO of Airfield Maintenance
Squadron, TAB - APGC. He
joined the RSAF in 1988 and has
assumed various appointments
including Flight Commander in
AMS PLAB & TAB and Section
Head in ALD. He was also
appointed Senior Project Officer
in Changi Programme Office
before moving on to be the first
CO of AMS CAB. LTC Chan
holds a Bachelor of Science
Degree in Computer Science
(Hons) from the University of
Portsmouth, UK and a Masters
in Business Administration from
UWA. He also attended the
Singapore Command and Staff
College in 2001.
18
Introduction
What is Occupational Safety and Health (OSH)? How does it
complement the key safety management framework as spelt out in
the RSAF Safety Management Manual? Is this just another goodto-have initiative? These were just some of the initial thoughts
that came across my mind when OSH was introduced to my
unit. An unclear understanding of the intent of OSH can lead to
unwanted queries and worse still, a blind implementation. Without
understanding the aims of OSH, changes are nothing more than
the enforcement of a new safety initiative. In the long-run, the
blind implementation of OSH may hamper its potential and render
its true intent ineffective. Over time, such an initiative becomes
administrative and thereby loses its effectiveness and value
altogether.
Today, the RSAF has put in place a sound Safety
Management System and a strong safety culture
that strengthens the belief that “Zero Accident is an
Achievable Goal”. The introduction of OSH served
to further advance the RSAF’s efforts in attaining
this goal. In this article, I would like to share some
methods of ensuring the successful introduction of
OSH into the unit.
Why the need for OSH?
In March 2005, the Government announced key
reforms to improve Singapore’s occupational
safety and health (OSH) standards. These reforms
were based on the premise that accidents can only
be prevented if all parties in the workplace take
personal responsibility in achieving higher safety
standards. Thus, a new framework was developed;
aimed at reducing deaths at workplaces by a
third in five years, and by half within a decade
or sooner. The Occupational Safety and Health
framework aims to cultivate good safety habits
in all individuals, so as to create a strong safety
culture at the workplace. The framework is guided
by the principles of:
a. Reducing risks at the source by requiring
all stakeholders to eliminate or minimise the
risks they create
b. Instilling greater ownership of safety and
health outcomes within the organisation
c. Preventing accidents through higher penalties
for compromises in safety management
Embracing OSH meant the need for a shift in
our mindsets: Firstly, from safety management
to active identification of risks and eliminating
them before they are created; secondly, from
mere compliance with “Letter of Laws” or Training
Safety Regulations (TSRs) to proactive planning
in creating a safer environment to work in; and
lastly, from thinking that accidents are costly to
understanding that poor safety management is
even costlier. Introducing OSH is a challenge; let
alone adopting it as a safety program. The need to
encourage people to adopt an OSH-based mindset
and embrace the central principles mentioned
above makes the process even more challenging.
The key to a successful implementation of OSH
in a unit lies in changing the way we see the
environment around us. Instead of inquiring what
governing rules there are that make the way we
work safer, OSH incites us to ask what we can
do to make the workplace and people working
within it safer. While the former assumes a
passive approach towards safety, the latter takes
on a different lens on enhancing safety at the
workplace in a proactive way. A key framework
from Organisational Learning (OL) was used to
help strategise the implementation of changes
required for a smooth and seamless adoption of
OSH into my Unit. I will be outlining my thoughts
and ideas using the Essence and Architecture
of a Learning Organisation framework.
Operationalising OSH using the essence and architecture
of learning organisation framework
Results
At its essence, every organisation is a product of
the way its members think and act. This framework
depicts 3 domains that create opportunities for
organisational learning. The first, at the bottom
left, is Results. This domain addresses questions
like “Why bother with OSH?”, “What difference
will it make to what we are currently doing?”
and “What are the measurable and observable
outcomes that the Unit wishes to create?” These
questions fundamentally address the need
for OSH in an organisation. Like it or not, the
successful implementation of OSH is ultimately
judged by the results it yields. However, as a
Squadron Commander, it is important that we
look not only at the results but more importantly,
at the key factors that led to the accomplishment
of the results. Central factors such as positive
attitude change towards safety and increased
safety innovativeness would indicate whether
people have internalised the principles of OSH.
In the same vein, all efforts should be channelled
19
RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 61
oct 09
towards improving these factors that are deemed
critical to create and sustain a lasting change. As
leaders, it is important that we exercise patience
as we all know that adapting to a new safety
initiative and internalising its mechanisms and
goals take time. This principle, while easily said, is
understandably difficult to achieve; for most of us
are seemingly pressured to produce results. This
is especially so when the framework of OSH is
incorporated into AMO/AFO (Audit on Maintennce
Operations/Audit on Flying Operations) audit
checklists. Therefore, attaining zero NCs does not
imply that you have fully grasped the essence of
OSH; nor does obtaining some minor NCs mean
that you are not doing anything. I remember one of
my former Commanders saying “when you do not
sight a wild boar in the airfield, it does not mean
that the wild boar is not out there”. We have to be
on a constant lookout for the “wild boar”. This is
congruent with the first principle of OSH, which
is to actively identify potential risks and eliminate
them before they pose a real danger to operations.
The next issue in measuring results is quantifying
them. Borrowing a quote from the The Fifth
Discipline Fieldbook, “Measure quantitatively that
which should be quantified; measure qualitatively
that which should not be quantified.” In all units
and organisations, it is easy to take important
indicators like AMO/AFO results, number of GAIRs/
FAIRs raised, and accident and incident records as
measurement of their overall safety health-state.
Equally important, from an organisational learning
perspective, are factors such as intelligence,
innovativeness, openness, high moral quality,
courage, confidence, and genuine care for the
safety of others and the
ing a
n perform
e
m
e
ic
rv
Se
u
water poll
tion test.
workplace. These intrinsic qualities are important
as they provide the depth for a sustainable change
within an organisation. While they are difficult
to quantify and measure, these qualities are
observable. Therefore, as a Unit Commander, I
often encourage my supervisors to actively look
out for the display of such qualities within the Unit
and highlight them for recognition. Such incidences
are often discussed in the Unit’s Quality & Safety
Meetings, featured during the Squadron’s Quarterly
Mass Brief and even displayed on the Squadron’s
Safety Notice Boards. The active promotion of
such qualities in the Unit emphasises the benefits
of OSH and how it has helped improve the quality
of the working environment. This in turn facilitated
the implementation of OSH in the unit and gave
my personnel greater confidence in the initiative by
allowing them to internalise many of the principles
of OSH. Only after changing people’s mindsets and
attitudes towards safety then can we achieve the
goal of zero accidents.
Implementing OSH
We now move on to the Domain of Action, which
addresses the question “How do we get started in
applying the framework of OSH to our Unit?” Before
the Squadron rushes into any actions, we must
begin with a clear guiding idea of what we want
to create for ourselves. We have to ask ourselves
what we desire from adopting the framework of
OSH. This clarifies the purpose of introducing
OSH and provides a clear understanding of where
we are heading. It was important that
I articulated
the purpose of OSH clearly when I first introduced
it; in order to muster the commitment of every
individual to ensure its successful implementation.
My ultimate aim is to generate a collective sense
of identity and purpose in my people, so that they
are committed to follow through with the fruition
of the implementation of OSH and even develop
creative solutions (on their own) to overcome any
problems along the way. New processes were
also developed and existing processes improved
and streamlined so that everyone in the Squadron
has the resources they need as we embark on the
OSH journey (Innovations in Infrastructure1).
The Squadron’s monthly Safety & Quality Meetings
were revamped, with a special segment focussing
solely on OSH related issues. Mass briefings were
conducted regularly to clarify issues and concerns
pertaining to OSH, as well as provide necessary
updates on the Squadron’s OSH journey. Monthly
CO’s Dialogues were held with specific groups
like the Staff Sergeants, Master Segeants (SSG/
MSG), Warrant Officers etc to reinforce the ideas
of innovation and reflection and also the need to
be proactive in seeking out potential risks before
they become hazards. During SODB (Start Of Day
Brief) and EODB (End Of Day Brief), questions
such as “What worked well?”; “What didn’t work
well?”; “What might you do differently the next
time?” were regularly posed to imbue a culture of
reflection and instil the deep learning cycle in the
personnel of my squadron. This is important
as such a structure
or process drives behaviour - when people think
constantly and reflect on how things can be done
better, we create a safer working environment for
everyone. Such a practice also creates a greater
sense of responsibility on the part of the individual,
as well as the people around him.
As part of the ongoing efforts to support the OSH
movement, extensive information was made
available over the intranet to allow quick and easy
access to it. Personnel were sent for the necessary
training courses to equip them with knowledge
that was required for implementing OSH in my
Unit (Theory, Methods and Tools2). They also
assisted in the necessary reviews and were
instrumental in the formulation of the obligatory
Hazard Identification & Risk Assessment (HIRA)
matrix for the Unit.
Sustaining OSH
The Domain of Enduring Change is the final focus
of the architecture of a Learning Organisation. This
is also known as the “The Deep Learning Cycle”. A
genuine learning cycle is operating when my men
are able to do things that they were not able to
do previously. The new skills and capabilities
developed serve to enhance their confidence in
not only the new mechanisms of OSH but also the
things it can help improve. As their new skills and
capabilities continue to improve over time, they
begin to be more aware and understand the intent
of things around them (new awareness and
sensibilities). Personally, I could recognise the
underlying structures that were driving the desirable
behaviours in my personnel. Gradually, this new
awareness was assimilated into basic shifts in
the form of attitudes and beliefs. Deep beliefs
and assumptions can change as experiences
change. When this happens, the culture changes
accordingly. Such a cultural shift will definitely
bear a heavy impact on the organisation - it
1. Innovations in Infrastructure - This is the means
through which an organisation make available
resources to support people in their work. Such include
time, management support, money, information, ready
contact with colleagues and more.
2. Theory Methods and Tools - The introduction of these
ideas represent a significant shift in our ways of thinking.
It is not about learning a new of theory but actually
practising new ways of doing things that would translate
to new ways of thinking. Such includes, reflections, small
discussion large group sharing, check-in & checkout
etc.
21
RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 61
Serviceman testing
the
emergency eye flush
oct 09
station.
heightens the understanding of
OSH and translates to greater
enthusiasm in the domain
of actions. What used to be
an enforced process now
becomes a norm that people
are quite comfortable with.
Such a deep, fundamental
change in the organisation's
safety culture will manifest
itself in the safety records
attained.
Personnel doing routi
ne
checks on the control
switches.
was OHSAS18001-certified in October 2007. The
certification itself would have meant nothing if
the squadron's personnel had not changed their
mindset towards safety. As elucidated earlier
in the introduction, we want to avoid a blind
implementation that merely changes the surface of
things but changes nothing much deep down. The
results of such an implementation will definitely
not last.
What are the differences ?
Conclusion
I have just shared my thoughts on the use of the
OL Framework, Essence and Architecture of a
Learning Organisation, in the operationalising
of OSH in my Squadron. As a framework, it
helped ensure a seamless implementation of the
required changes within my Unit in order to adopt
the principles of OSH, make it work and sustain
its efforts. Most importantly, my men acquired a
greater understanding of its intent and how it will
help create a safer working environment for all.
However, the biggest change lay in the attitude
of the squadron's personnel towards safety. It is
becoming clearer to all that safety is not just about
following a set of prescribed rules and regulations
closely and hoping that everything will turn out
fine. This would be reactive in nature. Under
the framework of OSH, safety is about being
creative. It requires everyone to proactively seek
out hazards and eliminate them. Furthermore,
OSH yielded the highest returns in terms of costs.
Airfield Maintenance Squadron, Tengah Air Base,
The RSAF has laid a strong foundation and
established a solid culture of safety over
the years. The introduction of OSH seeks to
complement the efforts in safety management
by making it even more robust. However, as
articulated in this article, OSH should not be seen
as merely another tool; but rather a framework
that will create a safer environment for all. A
clear understanding of the intent and principles
of OSH by every individual will generate a
sustaining change for the organisation. Using
the OL Framework, Essence and Architecture
of a Learning Organisation, was useful in
ensuring that this end was achieved. The RSAF
will definitely benefit from having individuals
who have internalised the essence of what OSH
seeks to achieve. Collectively, that will strengthen
the culture of safety even further.
22
Reference
Peter Senge's The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook
EMBARKING
Occupational Health
and Safety Assessment
Series Journey AIR MOVEMENT CENTRE
ON THE
INTRODUCTION
Author
L-R: MSG Muk Koon Chee,
2WO Lee Khee Leong,
3SG Justin Daniel Teo and
MAJ Tan Kok Hin
This article was jointly
contributed by the authors
above. They are currently with
the Air Movement Centre.
Air Movement Centre (AMC) has clocked a safety record of 32 accident-free
years, since its humble beginnings on 16 June 1977. People, processes and most
importantly, the belief in 'zero accidents' are the keys to developing this safety
culture. However, there is a saying that goes, “You should always be prepared
for the first accident”; which is worrying. How can we ensure the longevity of
the existing safety culture with people and the environment constantly changing?
Occupational Health and Safety Assessment Series (OHSAS) is the answer. It will
ensure that AMC's safety practices remain relevant and effective for generations
to come.
HIGHLIGHTING AIR MOVEMENT OPERATIONS
In the early days, AMC operated from Tengah Airbase and Seletar West Camp
in support of C130 flights, and from Paya Lebar Airport for MINDEF Chartered
Flights. In November 1981, AMC moved to its current location in Paya Lebar
Airbase. Today, AMC is a unit under the command of AOCG, ADOC, providing air
movement services for the SAF.
Essentially, AMC's expertise lies in the area of palletising and loading, which
include dangerous loads and cargoes for our C-130s, F-50s or KC-135s in support
of overseas missions. This requires the logistical planning for an aircraft's space
allocation and centre-of-gravity requirement, storage and handling of dangerous
cargoes as well as the operation of various heavy-lift equipment. Due to operational
requirements, AMC personnel are trained to operate from any airfield, at times
under unfavourable working conditions both locally and overseas. To ensure that
safety is not compromised when we are working in a location with limited support,
the team adheres to the basic safety principles of protecting humans and assets
when carrying out the task at hand. In addition, a team of AMC personnel is
always on a 24/7 stand-by to support any activation of the SAF for Peace Support
Operations (PSO).
23
RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 61
oct 09
WHERE HAZARDS LIE
Hazards associated with heavy machinery
operations, manoeuvring in confined space, and
handling of dangerous and odd-sized cargoes
are continually present in our operations. Coupled
with the need to maintain optimal mission time
on the ground, AMC is always working under the
pressures of time to complete its tasks swiftly. The
unit has supported several Humanitarian Assistance
and Disaster Relief (HADR) operations like the
evacuation of Singaporeans from Cambodia,
Philippines and Sichuan, China earthquakes.
AMC was also involved in one of the most massive
operations undertaken by the SAF - Operation
Flying Eagle, a humanitarian assistance programme
activated after the tsunami on Boxing Day 2004. Due
to the dynamic and uncertain nature of the missions,
the operational risk levels of AMC were raised for the
operational periods. The challenge to keep up with
these constant changes poses a hazard in itself.
In Banda Aceh, the assigned C130 was loaded
and packed with tonnes of supplies. As there
was no forklift available, all the supplies had to be
unloaded manually. Loading & unloading operations
were also conducted expeditiously due to limited
parking space. After the supplies were unloaded,
all aircraft had to depart almost immediately as a
result of the limited parking space. Back in PLAB,
there were no precursors for these missions to refer
to, and AMC worked round the clock. Due to the
excessive workload, Operationally Ready National
Servicemen and ex-staff that had been posted
out were subsequently recalled back to AMC for
three weeks to support the operations.
The operations in
Banda Aceh also
saw the successful
deployment of a
Mobile Air Traffic
Control
(MATC)
tower
for
the
very first time.
The MATC was
an
essential
replacement for
the seriously damaged control tower
in Sultan Iskandar Muda Airport. Without any manual
for reference, the AMC team had to rely on their
24
experiences and ingenuity to complete the loading
and unloading missions. Despite the high tempo and
tight timeline, all loading and unloading operations
were accomplished SAFELY with no delays. This is
an achievement that AMC is immensely proud of.
CURRENT SAFETY PRACTICES
AND SYSTEM
Various levels of regulatory publications ranging
from technical manuals and safety templates
to operational procedures govern Air
Movement Operations. Some examples of
the official publications that AMC adheres
to are the RSAF Air Force Operations
Regulations (AFOR), RSAF L series,
ADOCLO and APGCLO. In addition,
the International Air Transportation
Association (IATA) Dangerous Goods
Regulation and AAP3631-001 MB2 are
adopted to cater to the specific requirements
of handling dangerous cargo. In summary,
the regulators state that:
Dangerous goods are defined as goods consisting
of substances, materials or items with properties
that are a potential danger to aircraft or passengers
and crew and therefore require special precautions
when carried by air. Under the auspices of the
United Nations, the International System for the
Classification of Dangerous Goods has been
developed. This system divides dangerous goods
into 9 classes depending on the type of hazard the
item represents. The classes are listed below:
Class 1 –
Class 2 –
Class 3 –
Class 4 –
Class 5 –
Class 6 –
Class 7 –
Class 8 –
Class 9 –
Explosives
Gases
Flammable Liquids
Flammable Solids
Oxidising agents and Organic
Peroxide
Poisonous (Toxic) and infectious
substances
Radioactive substances
Corrosives
Miscellaneous dangerous goods
Over and above the strict adherence to regulations, all
personnel actively participate in safety programmes
such as the Unit's monthly Safety Day, which is held
in conjunction with the RSAF Safety Days. During
such sessions, specific safety topics are covered
while Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
(HIRA) exercises and quizzes are organised. Safety
emphases and lessons learnt from GAIRs are also
discussed and shared in the daily morning brief. The
intent is to engage our personnel and imbue safety
consciousness in their minds.
In 2008, AMC hosted the inaugural Safety Assistance
Visit (SAV) and Quality Assistance Team (QAT) visit
with the assistance from the command safety office.
The findings show that the safety management
system is firmly in place. Weak areas and gaps
highlighted by the visits were promptly addressed,
while areas that we had done well in were further
strengthened. This provided AMC with an opportunity
to re-think the current safety system and explore
ways to evolve effectively. As a result, the AMC is
currently embarking on the Occupational Health and
Safety Programme, in line with the Workplace Safety
and Health Act, which will further reinforce our safety
system. This will aid in nurturing a comprehensive
system of managing safety.
WHY OHSAS?
OHSAS (Occupational Health and Safety
Assessment System) was promulgated by the British
Standard Institute in 1999 and was revised in 2007.
It is a set of standards that states the requirements
for an Occupational Health and Safety Management
System (OHSMS). OHSMS is also a management
framework that enables organisations to control their
operational safety and health risks.
In recognising hazards, we are able to identify the
risks involved and mitigate them. Consequently,
our staff will be fully aware of the hazards in AMC
operations. This also serves as a reminder to all
personnel that each task is unique and we must be
au courant of the safety procedures and mitigating
factors that have been put in place. Additionally, we
want to identify, analogise and document the roots of
potential hazards and define their characteristics so
that others can learn together with us. Like the saying
goes, ''A wise man learns through mistakes; a
wiser man learns through others' mistakes.''
Another reason for the adoption of OHSAS is that
we wish to accomplish our operational goals safely.
In a bid for continual improvement, we strive to
benchmark ourselves against a high standard, which
underlines our utmost commitment towards safety
and operational readiness.
WHAT IS IN IT FOR AMC?
TThe end product is the promotion and
maintenance of the highest degree of physical,
mental and social well-being of our staff; and also
the prevention of any adverse effects on health
caused by working conditions. In doing so, we
are able to bring the existing safety system to the
next level and ensure its longevity by developing
a stronger safety culture for our people and others
involved.
Another benefit of OSHAS is that we instil
confidence in our personnel and eliminate the fear
of the ever-present hazardous pitfalls on the ground.
An interesting quote states that "Worrying is like
a rocking chair, it gives you something to do
but it doesn't get you anywhere". On this matter,
we will rather be proactive in identifying hazards so
that we can eliminate or reduce potential risks. With
this element eliminated, AMC personnel will then be
able to worry less and focus more on the job at hand
as we keep our turn-around-time to a minimal, in
accordance with the 4th principle of Aircraft Loading.
This is crucial given the nature of our work and the
conditions that we have to work in.
Importantly, an OHSAS certification accords a
1-year worldwide recognition through accreditation
and serves as evidence of the pledge we have
towards our job. Some of the key benefits include
the building of trust, minimisation of risk, reduction of
costs, demonstration of credibility and international
recognition.
CONCLUSION
Having provided air movement support all these
years, we are proud of the fact that we have
performed our duties effectively, efficiently and
professionally. We are convinced that through this
OHSAS journey, we can raise our air movement
standards to a higher plane. As a nouvelle vague,
we understand that this journey will be a long
and tedious one. Although the demands of the
OHSAS processes are vigorous and continuous,
they will accord our safety standards with a
recognised third- party attestation. As the adage
goes, ''A thousand-mile journey begins with
a single step''. This aperçu is emblematical of
AMC's determination to take many more steps
after the first.
25
RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 61
oct 09
Understanding Your
SOP Improves Decision-
Making And Safety
Author
MWO Edward Low,
Principal Inspector, AFI
MWO Edward Low is currently
the Principal Inspector in Air
Force Inspectorate. MWO Low
is also a Licensed Aircraft
Engineer.
26
The recent discussion topic on “Deviating from Standard Operating
Procedure (SOP) and Orders” in the recent CAF Safety Forum gave
cause for me to reflect on one of my past experiences during my
tour in Tengah Air Base as the F-16C/D Bed-down WO IC back in
1998. I would like to share an interesting event as it illustrated that
compliance to SOP is important, but that there may be situations
whereby we need to deviate from the SOP to achieve an important
mission outcome. However, my personal view is that the deviations
from the SOP are serious matters and these can only be done after
conscientious deliberations (and approval from the appropriate
authority if possible) as they may have catastrophic consequences.
In August 1998, four newly acquired F-16C/Ds by Singapore were
ready for an outdoor ceremony to officially incept the F-16C/D into
the RSAF by Dr Tony Tan (then DPM & Minister for Defence). As
the event drew nearer that day, the weather started to develop
unfavourably with heavy showers expected. The preparation
team members (led by SWO (retired) Laurence Chia) immediately
deliberated on this situation with COL (retired) Goh Yong Kiat (then
Commanding Officer ALS). CO ALS then consulted with BG (retired)
Loh Kok Hua, (then Base Commander) whether to
activate the wet weather contingency of towing the
two aircraft to the hanger for an indoor ceremony
in view of the impending inclement weather. The
Base Commander asked the preparation team to
wait for his instructions while he proceeded to
Air Traffic Control (ATC) tower to check the latest
weather status. However, before the wet weather
programme could be activated, it was already
pouring heavily at the aircraft parking area. With
important officials and foreign defence attaches
already present, the preparation team was very
clear of the importance of the mission outcome
and the challenge to tow the two aircraft into the
hangar in torrential rain. Due to the rain, the team
could not open the cockpits for the brakemen to
assume their positions. Hence, 1WO (retired)
Chew Ser Teck, Aircraft Team IC approached
CO ALS at the aircraft shelter. Saluting his CO,
1WO (retired) Chew sought approval to proceed
with aircraft towing operations without brakemen
in the cockpits. CO ALS immediately granted the
waiver to tow the two aircraft without the required
brakemen. A second wavier was also granted
to proceed with the aircraft towing operations
into the hangar without the tow supervisor and
the wing walkers. Two vehicles were deployed
to support the aircraft towing operation in the
torrential rain with the 1st vehicle guiding the
aircraft towing teams and the 2nd vehicle at the
rear of the second aircraft. During the towing
operation, the visibility was very poor due to the
heavy downpour. As one of the vehicle driver
who escorted the two aircraft, I remember vividly
that my visibility was less than 5 metres from the
vehicle’s windscreen!
Upon arrival of the two aircraft at the Hanger,
majority of guests and VIPs were already seated
for the indoor ceremony. DPM was at Base
Conference Room waiting for the commencement
of the ceremony. The situation was quite chaotic
then as our WO team had to quickly position the
two aircraft in place (again some of the SOPs
were not adhered to, such as no wing or rear
man during the reverse tow of the two aircraft into
position etc.). We also had to wipe dry the aircraft
and mop the wet floor for the commencement of
the ceremony. One of the USAF Officers remarked
to me that he was very impressed on how quickly
our RSAF team had put both aircraft in place and
got the place ready for the ceremony in such a
short time. As the ceremony commenced, our
team members were drenched, but we watched
the ceremony with pride from behind the windows
located at the 2nd level. The inception ceremony
proceeded uneventfully with a photo of the DPM
unveiling the 140 Squadron logo from the F-16C
aircraft gracing the front page of The Straits Times
the following day.
Weeks later, I asked CO ALS during an informal
session at TAB Officers’ Mess what was on his
mind when he granted the waivers to deviate
from the SOP during the day of the ceremony.
He responded seriously “if one of our men had
been struck by lightning that day, my career will be
gone”. As the Commander of the Logistics team,
the authority to deviate from the SOP lies with him
and he did so to ensure the successful execution
of the inauguration ceremony. However, if the
consequence of the deviation from SOP turned
out to be a disaster (i.e. any serious damage or
fatal injuries resulted from the towing operations),
majority of us would likely have thought that it
was a wrong call to deviate from the stipulated
SOP/Orders even though it was an important
inauguration event.
In conclusion, it would always be very difficult to
mitigate the deviations from SOP had it resulted in
any death or major safety incident. For this particular
case, the proactive risk management plan utilised
experienced personnel who understood the
rationale for procedures and resulted in a positive
outcome even though several SOP/Orders were
not followed in the process. Perhaps, this real
life situation of deviation from SOP serves to
illustrate the issues commanders or supervisors
have to face when they deviate from the SOP.
While it is important to adhere conscientiously
to the promulgated SOP during training, it is also
important not to be dogmatic. This experience
showed how the Commander exercised good
judgement and applied risk management well.
Despite the risks involved, the WO team who
executed the task was fully aware of the SOP
deviations. Last but not least, it is important for
the RSAF spectators (including a batch of newly
posted technicians from AETI) who witnessed the
SOP deviations by the preparation team (without
the background and foreknowledge that waivers
were approved) to understand and know that it
was not a case of loosening of discipline but rather,
an extraordinary situation where a judgement call
was needed and made.
27
RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 61
oct 09
OUTSTANDING SAFETY AWARD
On 08 July 09, CPL Ethan Chia (145 SQN), a Full Time National Serviceman (NSF)
Flight Line Crew was performing After Flight (AF) checks on an F16 after a Tactical
Intercept training sortie.
While inspecting the flaperon on the port side of the aircraft, he noticed that a screw
from the flaperon panel was missing. The missing screw measures approximately
15mm in length and 8mm in diameter. A runway sweep and FOD walk was conducted
around the dispersal that very evening.
A further confidence check was carried out on the rest of the fleet, and it was
discovered that there were other aircraft with the same screw not fully tightened.
The screws in this particular position were susceptible to be a TFOA. Due to CPL
Chia's vigilance, potential cases of TFOA were averted.
Although the FLC work-card calls for a general inspection in the incident area,
CPL Chia has displayed a high level of professionalism and attention to details
beyond the call of duty. He has thus been awarded the Outstanding Safety Award.
CAF Quarterly
Safety Forum
Date: 2 Sep 2009
Venue: Changi Air Base (W) Auditorium
28
Medical
Updates
The
Aeromedical
Centre
(ARMC)
has recently taken
acceptance of the new
Air Force Night Vision Integrated
Laboratory (ANVIL), a facility
designed to meet the night vision
training needs of the RSAF. The
ANVIL training capability will
bridge the gap in night vision
training by equipping our aircrew
with adequate knowledge and
skills to overcome the fatal threats
of Spatial Disorientation and
Controlled Flight into Terrain, of
which aircrew are at increased
risk during night operations.
The training concept and focus
are tailored to 2 main groups of
aircrew - ab-initio NVG qualification
training at the squadron level, and
refresher training for ops aircrew
with experience in the use of NVG.
!
NEW
Watch out for the full writeup!
RSAF & TNI AU
SAFETY EXCHANGE VISIT
The 6th Safety Exchange visit between the RSAF and TNI AU was succesfully conducted from 10-11 Aug
09 in Jakarta. Head Air Force Inspectorate, COL Ng Chee Keong, led a 4 man delegation for the visit.
The annual meeting underscores the close bilateral ties and further strengthens the strong safety emphasis
between the two air forces.
Apb Organises Human Factor
Management Workshop
For Unit Management
Over the years, statistics of accidents/ incidents have indicated that a large
portion of accidents are attributable to human error. With the expected
introduction new weapon platforms and complex systems into our organisation,
the RSAF personnel must be well equipped with the right Human Factor
Management tools to reduce the possibilities of human error. Organised by
Accident Prevention Branch of AFI and assisted by QAB-ALD, APB-ARMC
and AIB-AFI, the 2-day workshop was attended by Squadron COs, OCs
and S3s on 1-2 Oct 09 at the Air Force Training Command. Training the unit
leadership in HF management allows them to spearhead the safety emphasis
to the working level and propagate HF management as a major tool for
accident prevention.
Focus Quiz
Answer 3 simple questions and win a $30 BORDERS gift card.
1. Salt-laden sea is highly conducive to creating a rusting action on the aircraft.
True / False
2. The Woodside ReliefBand is a watch-like device used to prevent against motion
sickness. True / False
3. The International System for the Classification of Dangerous Goods divides
dangerous goods into 9 classes. True / False
Email your answers with your Rank / Name, NRIC, Unit and contact details to 2WO
Steven Goh from AFI before 1st Jan 2010.
The first 3 correct entries will receive a $30 BORDERS voucher each.
The contest is open to all except personnel from AFI and the FOCUS editorial board.
(Answers can be found in this issue of FOCUS)
Winner
s
FOCUS of
6 0 Quiz
:
REC Ya
ng Guoji
e
LTA Seo
w Feng
Chang
C P T Ch
ia Zhimin
g
29