April 2007 issue
Transcription
April 2007 issue
apr 07 RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 51 Back to the Future pg. 2 pg. 16 cover This cover illustrates the transformation efforts the RSAF has taken through recent years. Although ever-changing, the RSAF still believes the importance of basics, especially in safety. editorial board CHAIRMAN Strike Two! One More and You’re Out! contents 1 Foreword 2 Back to the Future Reflection on Safety in a Transforming Air Force 7 ISO 9001 & OHSAS 18001 Certification / Outstanding Safety Award 8 Are You Safe? Are You Aware? Enhancing Safety by Enhancing Situational Awareness: A Glimpse into the Future 13 Best Unit Safety Officers and Specialists 06/07 COL Kevin Teoh 14 Unit Accident-Free Flying Years Award MEMBERS 15 Chief of Air Force Safety Award LTC Chris Lim LTC Mike Yeo LTC Suresh Nava MR Edward Pang MAJ David Aeria MAJ William Sim MAJ (Dr.) Adrian Loh CPT (Dr.) Allan Ooi Ms Audrey Siah PRODUCTION CREW Editor MAJ David Aeria Assistant / Photographer 2WO Tommy Low Graphic Design & illustration VaCAIN DESIGN [email protected] Appreciation The Focus editorial extends its appreciation to MAJ (Dr.) Adrian Loh and 2WO Tommy Low for their invaluable contributions. We would like to welcome CPT (Dr.) Allan Ooi to the board. 16 Strike Two! One More and You’re Out! A F-5 Pilot’s Encounter with Lightning During Flight 20 PEL and SQT - What’s That? Reflection on Safety Management - A Commanding Officer’s Perspective 26 Hyping it Up Safety Publicity in the RSAF Thank you, Tommy On behalf of the editorial board, we extend our heartfelt appreciation to 2W0 Tommy Low, who has served in the Air Force Inspectorate and has been instrumental in the evolution of the FOCUS magazine and what it stands for today. His many contributions have not gone unnoticed, and has benefited the organisation in a big way. After a prolific tour of almost 5 years in AFI, Tommy is moving on, rendering his final contribution in this edition of FOCUS. We wish him all the best in his new unit and career in the RSAF. 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 posted on these sites : http://afi.rsaf.mindef/afi/index.html (intranet) www.mindef.gov.sg/rsaf/alert/nl-afn.asp (internet) foreword By COL Kevin Teoh Head Air Force Inspectorate As we come to the end of the workyear, I would like to reflect on AFI's milestones and achievements for the past year. Firstly, there was the re-organisation of the department. After the approval was granted in November of 2005, AFI underwent its 4th re-organisation in April 2006. Sizeable roles and responsibilities were added to its portfolio. A new branch, the Logistics Inspection Branch (LIB) was formed and Inspection Branch was renamed as Operations Inspection Branch, aligning to its functional role and responsibilities. The second area of significant accomplishment was the attainment of both ISO 9001:2000 and OHSAS 18001:1999 certifications by AFI on 9 March 2007, after a year of intense planning, preparation and hard work. The effort put in by all the staff within AFI underscores our commitment to a developing and maintaining a quality Safety Management System which is benchmarked against international standards. Looking ahead, there must always be a constant push to improve and build upon the solid foundation that has been laid, maintaining the momentum that has been created. The level of vigilance and professionalism that has been displayed throughout the year, as demonstrated by numerous Safety Awards presented, demonstrates how engaged our RSAF personnel are in the realm of Safety. It is important to reflect and share the lessons learnt from the events of the past year in order to enhance the effectiveness of our Safety Management System. We must continue to endeavour towards the collective goal of achieving "Zero Accident". 1 RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 51 apr 07 So much has been said about safety in the RSAF, that it seems a daunting task to ponder what other measures or improvements we can adopt to increase awareness of this important element even more and to minimise errors due to human fallibility. In this short article, we look at how far we have come from the past and what we could possibly do in the future to enhance the safety culture in the Air Force even further. THEN Maintenance Procedures Maintenance documentation for the older aircraft types were not as detailed and one had to actually learn by memory and actual observation. Trouble shooting of defects weighed heavily on the experience of the individual as he only had a circuit diagram and the pilot’s defect report to relate to and find a solution. As there were no trouble shooting guides to aid the specialist, a thorough understanding of the aircraft systems was an absolute necessity in order to devise a workable course of action to isolate and rectify the fault. While this makes the specialist think carefully on the actions to take after analysing the discrepancy, the lack of a standard work process can some times lead to disastrous consequences. 2 MW0 M.A. Pathi is currently the Command Chief Warrant Officer (CCWO) of Tengah Air Base. He was previously Chief WO at ALS, 140 & 143 SQNs. MWO Pathi attained his Advanced Diploma in Aerospace Engineering and Management from the Singapore Polytechnic in 2001, through CLASS sponsorship. One event that happened due to lack of standardised documented procedures occurred during an operational checkout of store jettison system on a Hunter aircraft during an overseas deployment. The checkout process required a technician in the cockpit to depress the store jettison button while another technician verifies the presence of the corresponding electrical signal at the pylon connector. However, technicians from the servicing section carried out this test by measuring it at the connector on the wing while flight line technicians performed the same by measuring the signal at the pylon connector which is downstream of the wing connector. During the incident, the checkout was being performed by two technicians from the servicing section. A squadron technician performing an inspection on the top of the aircraft saw that connector on the opposite wing was disconnected and realised that it needed to be connected in order for the signal to be measured at the pylon connector. As soon as he inserted the connector, the firing impulse signal went through the pylon connector that was already connected to the explosive cartridges and the fuel tank under the pylon jettisoned, narrowly missing the knee of another technician. There were no Job Guides or checklists in those days and the checkout methods devised by the servicing section and the flight line technicians were in principle, not faulty in any way. It failed only when the technicians from two separate workcentres were brought to work together, as in this situation during a detachment. Work Processes Work processes and safety regulations were also not so well articulated then, with many being frequently promulgated or refined as a consequential action to actual incidents or accidents. With effective safety education incident prevention programmes, the RSAF has instituted a relatively safe working environment. In such a cocooned setting, safety posters and classroom lessons alone may not convince individuals of some of the dangers. Many do not realise that some of the very SOPs that they are reading were literally written in blood ie, someone had actually paid a heavy price by being seriously injured or even loosing their lives for the introduction of the work processes or safe equipment. One such example is the case of an individual at one of our Ammo Depot who fell off a `farmer` tractor as it was reversing. He sustained a serious head injury and succumbed to it subsequently. The ‘farmer’ tractor had a 3 RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 51 apr 07 single seat for the driver with no passenger seat. However, it was common then, to have as many as 2 to 3 individuals piling up on the tractor by standing on its axle and holding on to the rear mud guards or to taking a ride in the trolleys and equipment that were towed behind it. We now have purpose built tow tractors and strict regulations governing the number of personnel allowed on the tractor, including a prohibition on personnel boarding the towed equipment. The general apathy of such individuals besides the often ‘itwill-not-happen-to-me’ attitude is that they don’t realise the consequences of their irresponsible actions. Effects from contact with some hazardous fluids, for example due to failure to don the appropriate PPEs, result in manifestation of occupational health problems, after many years, long after they have left the RSAF and often at a time when their family needs them the most. NOW Introduction of behavioural-based safety programs have yielded some results by employing education and intervention both by peer influence and use of safety prefects or safety warriors as they are called in some Air Bases. RSAF and the Air Logistics Organisation has come a long way from its early days. Now, with the introduction of new processes, techniques and competitive benchmarks, it has remoulded itself into a professional and reliable organisation. Introduction of ISO9000, resulted in our work processes and associated documentation becoming better articulated and structured, so much so that the cause of incidents nowadays are often due to personnel failing to abide by the regulations rather then the lack of such instructions. This ISO9000 certification has been revalidated time and again by external auditors, which demonstrated clearly that the Air Logistics Organisation`s quality processes are rooted firmly into its work culture and benchmarked against the best in the public sector. With the basic work processes and safety awareness firmly anchored down, RSAF is currently embarking on the Occupational Health and Safety program, in line with the Workplace Safety and Health Act, which would further enhance the quality of work in its workcentres. Gaps Despite all this, we continue to witness human factor related incidents. We have the occasional maverick who chooses to go off the beaten track by engaging in unsafe work practices, taking unnecessary personal risks by not utilising the PPEs that have been provisioned and made available at the workcentres. 4 With the RSAF reorganising itself into a 3rd Generation Air Force, it is clear that any safety or HF incident will most certainly impede the speed of its transformational efforts. Considerable time and attention will need to be diverted to investigate and correct these incidents; time and attention that could be more productively employed towards the achievement of RSAF’s transformational objectives. In this regard, supervisors have an important part to play in reducing and if not eliminating HF related incidents and maintenance errors by taking personal responsibiity to ensure the safe outcome of every task, be it in the sheltered confines of a hangar or out in an open flightline. It is important for all supervisors not to be lulled into complacency and to scrutinise accord equal emphasis to mundane day-to-day activities, to ensure that HF and safety related incidents are kept at bay by effective preventive measures and enforcement of safe work practices. Many of our younger specialists did not have the opportunity that their senior counterparts had, to witness some of the occupational injuries or incidents and to appreciate the importance of safety in the maintenance and operational environment. It can be extremely painful for the individual and costly to the organisation if these incidents recur due to failure on the part of the supervisors to inculcate into the juniors some of the valuable lessons learnt in the past. WHAT CAN WE DO BETTER Skills Training Classroom instructions are well structured in the RSAF with General Instructional Objectives and Specific Instructional Objectives mapping in detail, the material that is needed to be taught. In skills training however, there is currently no similar system to ensure that all essential information is imparted to the trainee. When instructing or demonstrating a task to trainees, it is important that the rationale for the procedure or action is explained to the trainees. The skills training program should be structured in a similar manner to that for classroom lessons so that the quality of training is consistent and trainee proficiency can be assured. Part of the information that needs to be imparted to an onthe-job trainee are past incidents or accidents associated to the task being taught. Presented at an opportune time and being directly related to the job being taught, the trainee will be able to retain the lessons learnt more effectively. He is also able to better appreciate the situation and how the incident or accident could have occurred, as he can physically relate it to the job that he is actually performing at that point in time. Here the senior supervisors and Training ICs must constantly be on the lookout for applicable articles to add to their training repository. Re-Currency Process Another area that we can improve upon in the new and transforming RSAF is on the applicability of our existing technical currency validation programs. The basis of the technical re-currency had originally been by accumulation of work hours related to direct aircraft work. This can mean that the individual could actually perform the same tasks repeatedly and as long as it is categorised as direct aircraft labour, he would have met the reauthorisation criteria. In recent years, this had been revised to a taskbased re-authorisation system, where performance of specific maintenance actions are pre-identified to ensure that the individual is exposed to a variety of tasks before being reauthorised. We can improve this even further by defining the different categories of skills and providing a clear rationale for application of the recurrency criteria. By instituting a clear guideline, re-currency requirements for all future introductions of maintenance tasks can be confidently determined. The rationale for re-currency and technical proficiency validation may be based on the following criteria: • Task performed based on memory without T.O. or instructions on hand for reference due to the nature of the task or operation, ie. eg. launch, recovery, scramble operations, etc. The potential for HF and maintenance errors are high for individuals that are not current with the procedures. • Immediate action procedures that may require specialist to react correctly in a specific sequence and at a rapid pace eg. Critical action procedures in reaction to an engine fire during a ground run, etc. Although the checklists may be available, the specilaist in these situations need to be thoroughly familiar and proficient with the mitigative actions, which can only be attained by periodic refresher training. • High risk activities or concurrent operations where the specialist needs to be psychologically prepared and work together as a single cohesive team eg. Integrated Combat Turnaround operations, Hot Pit Refuelling, handling live munitions, etc. In such situations, recurrency requirements ensure that the specialists are aware of 5 RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 51 apr 07 the risks associated with a multi-team operation in a environment. This is an absolute necessity in preventing potential accidents due to lack of proficiency, the consequential result of miscommunication, poor coordination, job sequencing or lack of situational awareness. By adopting the above approach, all existing tasks can be screened and only those that fall under the criteria above may need to be assessed for re-currency. Presence of well documented Technical Manuals, Job Guides, etc will assure the safe and thorough accomplishment of the other tasks that do not come under the criteria above. Continuous Trade Learning To abide by the goals of RSAF’s 3rd Generation transformation principles pertaining to dedicated focus at every level, we may also need to take a hard look at our continuous training programs. With the emphasis on precision strike capabilities and introduction of new weapon systems, there is a need for us to focus on developing our core competencies on skills training in these areas to level-up our capabilities and proficiency on these systems during Continuous Trade Learning (CTL) instead of concentrating predominantly on basic systems knowledgetype lessons. More opportunities should thus be provided during CTL to carry out hands-on practical tasks to enhance the proficiency, skills and thus the overall combat readiness of our specialists. Operational aircraft can be allocated for realistic training purposes and to maximise the training effort. Fundamental technical and system knowledge however, still needs to be nurtured as it forms an important foundational pillar in the aviation maintenance profession. Such fundamentals can be ingrained into our technicians through self-study guides, and assessed by means of mandatory quizzes and the annual Professional Knowledge Examination (PKE). Standardisation With the introduction of ISO9000, units in the RSAF were allowed to develop their own procedures for managing their work processes as long as it was within the broad principles stipulated in the higher orders. While the intent here is to provide flexibility to the workcentres and to encourage new ideas and methods, it may hamper standardisation of work processes which are essential in a military context. The flexibility accorded by ISO9000 may be critical for survival and competition of individual companies in the commercial arena, but it may be counter productive in a military unit where teamwork amongst its units is critical in times of combined operations, TTW and war. 6 This does not mean that we should refrain or stem the flow of development and and introduction of new ideas and concepts. WITs and USMS programs are the bedrock of creativity and innovation in the RSAF and this should continue to be encouraged as it helps to keep the RSAF at the forefront by improving our work processes and operational capability in the workcentres. However, instead of having a multitude of methods and work processes in different workcentres, it may be prudent to identify the best of these ideas and work processes and standardise it across the RSAF units. Units then do not have to waste precious brain-bytes, each developing their own variation of common work procedures. Standardisation of basic work processes and the myriad of documentation that goes along with it will also facilitate rapid assimilation of personnel transiting from one unit to another. They will not have to waste time relearning some of the most basic procedures before actually contributing productively to the new unit. This may be essential in actual operations where manpower resources from different squadrons may have to work hand in hand. With the basic work processes and documentation being standardised, units can focus on developing new capabilities or honing their skills further to support existing operations. Conclusion The air force, in the midst of transformation would require conscientious effort of all specialists and officers to reduce if not eliminate safety related incidents. This can also be effected by education, creating awareness and enforcement by all supervisors. Past lessons learnt should be captured and reiterated to the newer technicians as vividly as possible so that it has a profound impact on these individuals and consequently instill a safety culture in them to prevent such incidents from recurring again in the future. We should also use the experiences that we’ve gained through the years to improve our operations by thinking out of the box and improving on our current work processes. These improvements, albeit being small and incremental at times, may in total, help us reduce our workload by streamlining our processes. We must constantly be on the look out for better, safer and more efficient ways of carrying out our tasks bearing in mind the overall objectives of the air force and the limited resources available to us. Legacy systems and methods may occasionally need to be tweaked or even completely overhauled to stay relevant with the air force’s current goals. Supervisors must make it their personal responsibility to maintain safe operations by judiciously enforcing safety and regulatory guidelines to eliminate HF incidents. . Air Force Inspectorate (AFI) is proud to announce that the department has attained the ISO 9001:2000 - Quality Management System (QMS) and the OHSAS 18001:1999 - Occupational Health and Safety Management System (OHSMS) certification in Mar 2007. This is a strong affirmation that both our current QMS and OHSMS in AFI matches international standards while ensuring the safety and health of our staff at their respective workplace. Safety is one of the core values of the RSAF. A strong Safety Management System, coupled with a good safety record will project a positive image of our operational readiness and deterrence. The attainment of the ISO 9001:2000 and the OHSAS 18001:1999 certification is an attestation of our ability and commitment to achieve RSAF's overall safety mission. AFI's ISO 9001:2000 certification was first mooted by HAFI in May 06, a month after the Logistics Inspection Branch (LIB) was created in AFI. The OHSAS 18001:1999 certification was subsequently included as AFI spearheaded the OSH initiatives in the RSAF. The embarkation of both the ISO 9001:2000 and OHSAS 18001:1999 certification signified the emphases of high quality and safety management standards to be maintained at all levels and every aspects of the department. While most of AFI's processes are already in place, the certification journey has provided an excellent opportunity for AFI to review and rethink how we could be further streamlined and strengthened. It was a good educational and enriching journey for all AFI staff, especially for the Inspection Branches (OIB and LIB), as we were put into the "auditee" position. Overall, AFI has done very well in the certification audit. There were zero "nonconformance" and 2 "opportunities for improvement". Positive comments from TUV SUD, the certifying agency, indicated the positive attitude and the good understanding of the ISO 9001:2000 and OHSAS 18001 standards requirements displayed by all AFI staff as well as the good framework established within the department. The challenge to maintain the QMS and OHSMS to international standards relies on our people's belief and commitment together with the necessary management emphases. On 30 Apr 2006, during an exercise sortie, two pairs of fighters, Curtain (2 x F5S) and Mentor (2 x F5S) were assigned to a Control Agency for Air Defence missions. However, Curtain and Mentor went under the control of separate controllers within the same Area of Operations. After intercepting a group of bogeys, Curtain was assigned the defenders' height block of 700010000ft by Controller A to reset their CAP. At this point, Mentor, at 9000ft, acquired a radar contact and was informed by Controller B that it was an unknown and directed Mentor for an intercept, without realising that the unknown was actually Curtain. With both formations in the same altitude block, and lateral separation quickly reducing, the control team transmitted on GUARD 243.0Mhz to direct the aircraft to take avoidance action. The control team (MAJ Lau Mun Leng, CPT James Goh, CPT Andy Yong, CPT Teo Weo Keong and LTA Eng Kian Tiong) had taken the extra effort of keeping a watch over operations conducted under a separate control agency, based on past lessons learnt. More importantly, they had exhibited excellent crew co-ordination and timely decision making to CRM the Control Agency when the need arose. This prevented the incident from developing into an accident. Such CRM that is beyond the call of duty is especially noteworthy. For their excellent performance in averting a potential mid-air collision, the team has been awarded the Outstanding Safety Award. 7 RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 51 apr 07 Chua Khim Teck, Desmond is currently an aviation psychologist of Performance Maximisation (PMAX) Branch at the ARMC. He has a Bachelor of Social Sciences (Hons) from the National University of Singapore. Are you safe? Are you aware? Enhancing Safety by Enhancing Situational Awareness: A Glimpse into the Future The development and proliferation of high technology systems across industries worldwide is now placing even higher demands on the cognitive skills of today's people. In the military, no less, especially in the RSAF where operators are now required to work with far more complex multifunctional systems, dealing with more data or advanced information technology, whilst working across work teams mostly distributed through time and space. It is no longer the case that if one has stick and rudder skills, it will be fairly certain that one can make it as a pilot. Today’s pilot has to possess highly sophisticated knowledge, be able to perceive new information and changes quickly and accurately, manipulate these in their memory space to then use these to conduct mental activities such as planning, problem solving, decision making and anticipating uncertainty, while flying a high performance aircraft safely. It is a superhuman effort, and those in the aviation industry agree that one is who able to do all these is one who has a superior level of situational awareness (SA). It is therefore ironic that for a term that is so well used and readily understood by aviators, researchers have so far still been unable to come up with a universally agreed upon definition for SA. There is therefore however, some extent of agreement, and researchers have chosen to agree to disagree and accept that many approaches and models can be used to define SA. Without a clear understanding of what SA entails, the research in SA enhancement has been sporadic to say the least. This has resulted in the situation that whilst most agree that an even higher level of SA is required today, the technologies that are available to train SA still lags far behind. 8 Attention Level 1 SA: PERCEPTION STIMULI Short-Term Sensory Store Decision Making Perception Response Execution Working Memory Long-Term Memory Level 2 SA: & Level 3 SA: COMPREHENSION PROJECTION Feedback So what are the elements and key processes that work to improve SA? For those unfamiliar with the concept of SA, the most established definition for SA is Endsley's (1988) definition: “SA is the perception of the elements in the environment within a volume of time and space, the comprehension of their meaning and the projection of the status in the near future”. Perception, Comprehension and Projection are termed Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3 SA respectively. The diagram above illustrates how one process information and how it impacts on one's SA. A person first perceives information around him through the five senses via the shortterm sensory store which acts as a filter to information coming in, after which perception of information kicks in. As there is usually constant bombardment of sensory stimuli, one needs to be selective about the information that he is attending to prevent information overload, and this is dependent on the use of one's attention resources through correct task prioritisation and management of attention resources. The perceived information will then be processed and integrated in working memory to give a mental picture of the current status, which is really Level 2 SA at work. As in the previous stage of perception, this processing takes up attention resources. Thus, if one was task overloaded, he might not have sufficient spare capacity to comprehend the significance of the perceived elements. Next, one then matches the current mental picture to his knowledge and experience to predict the most likely future status (Level 3 SA) for further decision making and action, which impacts the environment, after which the cycle would repeat again. Again, all this processing takes up attentional resources. If you have not noticed already, the key element here is attention. Unfortunately, the human's attention resources are limited in capacity, so how well a person functions and performs depends very much on whether attention resources can be increased in capacity. The way researchers have worked round this problem is to come up with ways of making one's attention resources work more efficiently. Despite this, there have been some successes, with others showing potential for success. This article would hopefully shed light on some of the techniques that researchers are working on that hold some hope for those who are not so blessed with high level of cognitive abilities or SA. For those who are already there, they can look forward to surpassing themselves. At the organisational level, a global improvement in SA can definitely influence aviation safety positively. 9 RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 51 apr 07 Are you seeing what I’m seeing? Vision, one of the most fundamental components in flying and in many other tasks, can be likened to torchlight beam searching in the dark. Only if you choose to look, then you will see. It is also well known that experts are able to scan better than novices. Their experiences allow them to adopt more efficient and accurate scan patterns, focusing on the right component at the right time. It is therefore most intuitive that researchers have suggested that by training novices and giving them pointers on adopting the scan patterns of experts, they can improve their performance. This has been something done throughout the history of aviation, with flight instructors doing just that, and we are still awaiting more improved and effective strategies that do not require the same passage of time. What is new however, is that recent research suggests that people seem to often “see” but not see. The phenomenon of change blindness indicates that when there are large changes in a visual display accompanied by sudden motion, people often fail to notice these changes. This is best described by a study done to look at how Navy pilots used a head up display on an aircraft simulator. Just before landing on the simulated aircraft carrier runway, a large aircraft was put on the deck on the aircraft carrier at the point of touchdown, and because the pilots were not expecting it, they failed to detect it even though it was very salient and meaningful to their situation. This often occurs when distractions draw away the person’s attention from the change, and often leads to detection failure, which can be potentially dangerous and disastrous. An example of the pictures used in change blindness research. The 2 pictures are typically shown alternatively, interspersed with a blank screen. Subjects can take up to more than 40 alternations before detecting the change. Training has been designed to deal with change blindness in research on road drivers, which seems to show some success in reducing vulnerability to change-detection failures. The training consists of training scan strategies and equipping them with change-detection tools, rather than leave it to the less than perfect human memory systems and attentional processes. In fact, researchers are now looking into training solutions for training those interacting with complex visual displays in process monitoring and control systems and hopefully some of these techniques can be then applied in aviation as well. 10 Are you game enough? Computer games hold large appeal for the generation Y population, and what better excuse to stay glued to the computer for hours, if by playing them you can also improve your situation awareness, and therefore flying performance? The good news is that computer games have been shown to improve flight performance through the training of attention control skills. Before you get too excited and rush out to purchase an X-Box or Microsoft Flight Simulator for yourself, you might want to be aware of some additional information. It doesn’t work with any computer game, and it entails instructed practice coupled with a specific supervised training strategy directed towards improving attention management skills. An international research collaboration sought to take advantage of the burgeoning microprocessor technology and techniques in computer graphics to study a new approach to training. They developed training strategies embedded in a complex computer game named Space Fortress, which they then successfully fielded in a military flight school to and demonstrated a transfer of skills to flight performance. Space Fortress was designed to simulate a complex and dynamic flight environment modelled on an analysis of the military flight training programme. The game requires one to control the movement of a spaceship while aiming and firing missiles to destroy the space fortress, while having to protect the ship from hostile elements and manage resources under severe time pressure and high workload. The game components include high visual monitoring and scanning demands, difficult manual control, shortterm memory load, long-term memory of procedures, and resource management considerations. The most important element in the game is the training of attention control, which in turn determines how much capacity one has to process the demands of Level 1, 2 and 3 situational awareness (see information box). The idea is that pilots are required to multitask; to simultaneously control the aircraft, monitor the outside environment, scan their instruments, and handle radio calls. In an ideal case, the pilot can fully attend to each component, but because it is not possible, pilots have to adopt strategies of attention allocation and change the priorities of attending to task elements during the different segments of their mission. It has been found that when pilots develop their experience through trial and error under high load conditions, they tend to adopt suboptimal strategies that tend not to be changed or replaced by better ones with the progress of experience. Therefore, by training the systematic manipulation of emphasis on different task elements, it enables one to explore a wider range of attention strategies and improved their ability to cope with high workload, and resulted in significantly better performance. Furthermore, it was also found that this ability was shown to generalise to new task situations. 11 RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 51 apr 07 Are you in the Zone? We all have good days where everything goes well and bad days when somehow things just cannot be done right. Elite athletes train themselves to the point where they are able to be in the “zone” for every competition they participate in, where they are at their peak performance. Examination of the brainwaves of a group of bomber pilots showed that better pilots were able to sustain a higher level of concentration and took shorter microbreaks of relaxation than others. Various tools that measure neurofeedback have been used to train and improve attention control. The aim is that through biofeedback information that allows monitoring of one’s concentration level, one can learn to gain control of their concentration and strengthen their ability of their executive attention network to focus attention. The fundamental basis of such training is that all healthy individuals cycle between concentration and relaxation by focusing on a task until it is done, and then taking a brief rest. Problems start when one engages in consistent and intense concentration for long periods, because even the best brain cannot concentrate forever. Neurofeedback training teaches one to take brief, relaxing microbreaks which recharge the brain, whilst at the same time strengthening their ability to intensify alertness levels. It also trains performance of sequences of alertness and microbreaks, and trains one to perform at high levels of alertness in spite of distractions. A system called Peak Achievement Trainer has been proposed for military uses as a mental exercise trainer used to enhance one’s capacity for concentration and alertness, helping recruits with attention problems and enhancing memory and new learning. It remains to be seen whether it would be as useful in the military as it has been for elite athletes. A golfer who is configuring his Peak Achievement Trainer before taking a golf swing. The cap he's wearing contains electrodes which monitor his brainwaves, and transmit it to the laptop through radio signals. Final thoughts As you can see, there is no magic pill, because unfortunately, the old adage holds true. Practice makes perfect. There are no two ways about it. But there are ways to make the practice shorter, more efficient, and more effective. And of course, it helps that we may in future be able to give better solutions to preventing loss of SA than the usual tips on being more aware, recognising early signs of lost SA, and communicate. . References Durlach, P.J. (2004). Change Blindness and Its Implications for Complex Monitoring and Control Systems Design and Operator Training. Human-Computer Interaction, 19(4), 423-451. Endsley, M.R. (1988). Design and Evaluation for Situation Awareness Enhancement. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 32nd Annual Meeting, 97-101. Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. Gopher, D., Weil, M., & Bareket, T. (1994). Transfer of Skill from a Computer Game Trainer to Flight. Human Factors, 36(3), 387-405. 12 Gopher, D., Weil, M., & Siegel, D. (1989). Practice Under Changing Priorities: An Approach to the Training of Complex Skills. Acta Psychologica, 71, 147-177. ANNUAL SAFETY AWARD WINNERS 06/07 BEST SAFETY SPECIALIST AWARD FORMATION NAME SQUADRON Tengah Air Base MSG Frederick Neo Chu Yeow 1SG Edmund Eng Kiat Hwee SSG Tan Chee Wei William 1WO Tan Eng Ann SSG Song Hin Foong MSG Lau Han Seng MSG Lee Ching Siong 2WO Darren Tang 1SG Ng Kok Wee MSG Leong Kah Fai 1SG Pey Tien Chun 1SG Jerry Koh Hong Heng SSG Kumaresan Base Safety Office 143 SQN 149 SQN ALS 125 SQN 120 SQN AFOG 163 SQN 112 SQN 145 SQN 128 SQN Paya Lebar Air Base Sembawang Air Base Air Defence & Operations Command Changi Air Base UAV Command Flight Test Centre Flying Training School 150 SQN FMN BEST UNIT SAFETY OFFICER AWARD FORMATION NAME SQUADRON Tengah Air Base CPT Lester John Fair CPT Joshua Wu Tze Ken LTA Soh Hua Lie MR Foo Jong Han CPT Goh Ho Kee MAJ Tan Meng Hwa Garion CPT Fong Meng Chuan CPT Ng Teck Chye MAJ Regina Kim Lee Hoon CPT Peng Chee Seng 143 SQN ALS FSS ALS AFOG 18 DA BN UTS 121 SQN FSS 127 SQN Paya Lebar Air Base Air Defence Operations Command UAV Command Changi Air Base Sembawang Air Base MOTOR TRANSPORT SAFETY AWARD FORMATION HQ RSAF Air Force School Air Force Supply Base Flying Training School Paya Lebar Air Base Sembawang Air Base UAV Command 13 RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 51 121 SQN,CAB apr 07 STANDARDS SQN, FTS (Aust) SQUADRON 121 SQN, CAB STANDARDS SQN, FTS (Aust) 122 SQN, PLAB 149 SQN, PLAB 124 SQN, FTS 150 SQN, FTS (Fra) AIR GRADING CENTRE, FTS (Aust) 143 SQN, TAB 144 SQN, PLAB 140 SQN, TAB 145 SQN, CAB 125 SQN, SBAB 127 SQN, SBAB PEACE PRAIRIE (USA) 112 SQN, CAB PEACE VANGUARD (USA) FTC 126 SQN (Aust) UAV TRG SCH, UC PEACE CARVIN 2 (USA) 120 SQN, SBAB 128 SQN, UC 14 122 SQN, PLAB YEARS 34 years 31 years 30 years 21 20 17 17 17 15 15 14 12 11 11 7 3 3 3 2 2 1 1 121 SQN,CAB STANDARDS SQN, FTS (Aust) 122 SQN, PLAB CAF SAFETY AWARD On 30 Nov 06, after 40 minutes into a SCT sortie, MAJ G S Kullar experienced an engine low oil pressure situation. Upon checking the other engine instruments, he noticed that the RPM gauge was indicating zero even though the engine was still running. The engine then developed a knocking sound with the propeller turning erratically. The Manifold Air Pressure was then observed to be reducing without any manipulation of the throttle levers. The engine rough running and knocking worsened with an associated loss of power. A MAYDAY call was immediately declared. MAJ Kullar initiated a forced landing onto an emergency airstrip located within the training area. The aircraft landed successfully onto the emergency airstrip followed by an engine seizure upon landing due to lack of lubrication. There was no damage to the aircraft, civilian property or lives. MAJ Kullar had remained calm, composed and focused throughout the emergency and hence, handled the situation very well in this trying and time critical emergency. He also exhibited sound judgement, good systems knowledge, and displayed exceptional flying skills that culminated in effecting a flawless and successful landing. For this, MAJ Kullar has been awarded the Chief of Air Force Safety Award. On 26 Jul 06, SSG Vija Kumar was the driver of a 10-ton High Mobility Carrier Truck (HCMT) which was part of a convoy of equipment travelling from Darwin Airport to RAAF Tindal Airbase in support of Exercise Pitchblack 06. After the 60km mark, SSG Vija and the Vehicle Commander, noticed some abnormalities on the HCMT's instrument panel. The speed display suddenly dropped to zero for approximately 3 seconds, then to resumed the correct speed indication. SSG Vija calmly maintained the vehicle on a stable course and speed, minimising disruptions to the entire convoy. Subsequently, the speed display dropped to zero for a second time. At this point, the decision to pull to the side of the road was made. As SSG Vija manoeuvred the HCMT safely to the side of the road, a loud bang was heard from the base of the vehicle and thick smoke was observed. The compressed air system pressure was also observed to be slowly dropping to 5 bars which is below the minimum of 10 bars required for proper brake function. Upon inspection, 2 of the HCMT's brake hoses were found to be leaking heavily. Given the massive weight of the radar cabin that was mounted on the HCMT (22-ton) and the speed it was travelling at, the consequences of a total brake failure would have been severe. In bringing the vehicle safely to a stop and averting a possible accident, SSG Vija displayed a high level of professionalism and skill in handling this time critical emergency. For this, SSG Vija has been awarded the Chief of Air Force Safety Award. 15 RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 51 apr 07 Strike Two! One more and you’re out! CPT Goh Han Wee is currently a Qualified Flying Instructor (QFI) in 149 Squadron, the Fighting Shikras. Prior to this posting, he graduated from the USAF UPT course in year 1999 and was posted to 149 Squadron, as an Ops Pilot, after the F-5 conversion course. He subsequently completed the Flying Instructor Course in year 2003 and followed on to serve as a QFI in 130 Squadron in Perth, Australia. It was a typical day during the NE Monsoon period that starts from late November / early December, with the weather forecast during the squadron's Start-of-Day brief being isolated thunderstorms and rain during our flying waves. I was planned for a Tactical Intercept 2v1 Mission, number 2 in the lineup and the flight supervisor of the formation. Mission was thoroughly briefed with the flight lead covering some of the weather considerations as part of the Special Interest Item for the mission. A final check of the weather on the weather radar and the absence of a meteorological warning/advisory gave us the assurance that weather was good enough for flying operations before we walked out for our mission. During the taxy to the end of runway for the final aircraft check before take-off, a visual check on the weather along the departure route had me thinking “Ok, weather towards the west is no factor”. The Pandan East(PE) Departure routing is generally a westerly track followed by a left turn for a easterly track to the training 16 areas in South China Sea. 5 mins after airborne, on a westerly heading, a weather pirep (pilot's report) given by an aircraft operating overhead the island was passed to our formation by the Departure Controller. A weather buildup with no lightning activity was observed to the east of our position and along the departure route that might affect us when we track easterly eventually. Shortly, the flight lead called for the formation to string out to 1nm trail in anticipation of any weather penetration. With the formation established in an Indian-trail, the formation was cleared a left turn towards the east and that was when the flight lead and myself (number 2 in formation) had a good look at the reported weather buildup. Departure Controller subsequently checked if the reported weather was penetrable and the flight lead replied “Affirm” but requested for a heading deviation towards the north of the PE track. I assessed the buildup to be a towering cumulus cloud with a whitish grey appearance, ceiling height unable to assess, low-level base and a diameter approximately 5-8nm stretching from slightly north to south of the PE track. With that assessment, I agreed with flight lead's decisions that the buildup was penetrable and of the deviation heading, as it would allow the formation to circumnavigate towards the north of the weather buildup. Due to the narrow departure corridor, the Departure Controller checked if the formation could accept a easterly heading and the flight lead replied “Affirm”. Clearly an easterly heading would bring the formation into the weather but based on my assessment of the weather being penetrable(no lightning activities reported or sighted) and that we would penetrate it at its fringe, as the formation supervisor I concurred with the flight lead's decision. The aircraft was flown in a manner as stipulated in the base order/techincal manual, e.g. Select constant power setting to fly at weather penetration speed, turning on the engine anti-ice device, etc, prior to entering the weather. The flight became more and more bumpy with slight to moderate turbulence and slight precipitation experienced shortly after the entrance with me thinking “it's ok, just maintain constant flying attitude. I was still 17 RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 51 apr 07 feeling comfortable but my hair started to stand when I spotted a flash not so distant away. Relieved it did not hit my aircraft, I was hoping it did not affect my other two formation members as well. But my hope was almost immediately dashed when number 3 reported that he had experienced a lightning strike but all onboard systems and engine health were in normal operating conditions. That was when I thought “It's no longer ok” and came on the radio to advise Departure Controller that PE departure was not longer recommended. Anticipating that there would probably be more lightning occurring kept my fingers permanently crossed. As I was hoping I would exit the weather the very next second, Murphy decided to pay me a visit. A glaring bolt of lightning was observed in front of my canopy accompanied with a loud bang that would scare the bravest soul on earth. My onboard digital displays flickered for a moment and the voice message system, aka the Bitching Betty, was screaming “Engine, Engine” a couple of seconds later. I checked my Engine Performance Indicators(EPI) immediately and analysed the problem as a left-hand engine flame out. “How could a lightning strike cause an engine flameout?” I asked myself unbelievably. Putting my doubt aside, I began to handle the emergency and that was when I finally exited the weather, which came a little too late. I guess the flight lead was the lucky one because out of the three aircraft, only his escaped without any damage. Or else, it'd have been Strike Three. Fortunately, the F-5 has two engines and it is totally flyable even with only one engine operating. Coupled with the altitude I was at (19,000'), I knew I had some time to react to the emergency. The affected throttle was placed to the stop position and the Flight Reference Card(FRC) was reviewed. A check on the EPI indicates the left-hand engine was windmilling and suitable for an engine airstart. Following the steps as stipulated in the FRC, a successful engine airstart was carried out. I informed my flight lead and Departure Controller of my problem and the decision to initiate a Return-To-Base(RTB). 18 “Hell! No way am I going to enter that weather again!” I reminded myself and requested for both an altitude and track deviation on my return leg. The aircraft landed off uneventfully and during the post-flight walk around check, I was shocked to see the damage sustained due to the lightning strike. The top ILS GS/LOC antenna located at the top of the vertical tail fin was ripped off. So how did a lightning strike cause an engine flame out? Apparently this wasn't the first time such occurrence had happened, in fact this was the third case in RSAF F-5 history. Engine parameters data reviewed by the technical specialists suggested that the lightning strike superheated the air around the aircraft which significantly deteriorated the quality of air entering into the engine. Not forgetting that the turbulence and precipitation encountered might have a contributory factor leading to the flame out. In retrospect, better assessment and judgement on my part would have prevented the emergency from happening. A whitish grey appearance does not necessarily mean it's all good inside, do not trust visual appearance to be a reliable indicator of turbulence and precipitation inside a thunderstorm. Although no lightning activity was reported, do not assume so as weather could deteriorate rapidly. Time and situation permitting, make use of onboard radar to assess the extent of the weather buildup. Climbing above the buildup wasn't feasible in my case as I wasn't unable to assess the ceiling but it was definitely in excess of 30,000'. Clear the top of a known or suspected thunderstorm by at least 1000 ft and do not fly below it as turbulence and wind shear below could be disastrous. So the only way was to circumnavigate it laterally but did I adhere to the guideline of avoiding thunderstorms by at least 20nm? Answer obviously is No. Thinking of how the situation would have been much more serious and uglier still send cold shivers down my spine, it also dragged me out of the little comfort zone I was in to learn or re-learn some very important lessons. While it is almost like a daily event to be flying in or with some weather around in local context, where rapid weather buildups are all not so uncommon, we as aviators should not be desensitized by the “Been there, done that” mentality. We have to constantly remind ourselves to recognize and respect the hazards of thunderstorms. I am sure if I were to be put in similar situations again, I'd do the right thing and follow the classic sayings of “Avoiding thunderstorms is the best policy” and “Turn back is always an option”. 19 RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 51 apr 07 LTC Daniel Siew Hoi Kok is currently a branch head in JCISD. His previous appointments include CO 165 Sqn and branch head in APD. He attended the Singapore Command and Staff College in 2003. LTC Daniel graduated from NTU with a Bachelor of Engineering in 1992. He holds a MBA from Nanyang Business School, Singapore, and a MSc from Naval Postgraduate School, USA. He also obtained a Graduate Diploma in Organisational Learning from the Civil Service College in 2005. Bio-data: Reflection on Safety Management – A Commanding Officer's Perspective Introduction Safety is of utmost concern to every squadron Commanding Officers (COs) in the RSAF. It is so important that the Air Force has added ‘Safety’ to the existing seven core values in the SAF. It could determine whether the CO has done his job well enough. However, safety can never exist in isolation, because the raison d'etre for a CO is to make sure that whatever missions (be it peacetime or wartime, ops or non-ops) that are assigned to the squadron be accomplished, albeit safely. How to balance between missions (i.e. operations) and safety can be tricky. There are various “safety models” that were offered to help commanders focus their attentions on balancing these two demands (ops and safety). Throughout my tour as CO, I have used both analogies to understand the need to balance ops with safety. On top of that, by borrowing the idea from the Organisational Learning (OL) PEL Triangle framework (see Figure 1), I have been emphasizing safety in the squadron through what I call the SQT Triangle framework (see Figure 2). 20 OL PEL framework The PEL Triangle framework helps people understand that if we just emphasise performance alone, the total results (represented by the volume of the shaded triangle) will never be good enough. It postulated that there must be enough emphasis on experience and learning at the same time, in order to expand the total results. This is because we are dealing with people. As much as we can overemphasise the importance of performing, we will not be able to sustain getting good total results in the long run if the people have bad experience and learn nothing throughout. SQT Triangle framework We are also dealing with people in our accomplishment of missions. Similar to the PEL Triangle framework, the SQT Triangle framework helps people understand that if we just emphasise safety alone, the missions achievement (represented by the volume of the shaded triangle) will never be good enough. We need to concurrently emphasise training and quality, in order to achieve good mission results. As much as we can overemphasise the importance of safety, we will not be able to sustain getting good mission results all the time if the people have poor training and lacks quality awareness. 21 RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 51 apr 07 Why is there the need to emphasise all three areas? Attaining the missions assigned to the squadron must be the key objective for any unit. Therefore, all activities must be for the attainment of the assigned missions. AFI has also since 2004 changed the safety logo/theme from “Safety Everywhere Always” to “Mission Success, Safety Always”. However, I see that in mission attainment, the other two components, that is, training and quality, must also be emphasised. Missions, in reality, include ops and non-ops activities, which means anything that the unit personnel do could contribute to the attainment or under achievement of the missions. This also means that anything can happen. For instance, even a simple administrative vehicle run could cause you dearly if you do not pay attention to all the three areas. Safety Emphasis - Doing Things Safely Safety, of course, is about doing things safely. However, it is not just about the commanders emphasising safety that things must be done safely. Everyone in the unit must do things safely. The revised RSAF's fourth safety principles aptly sums it: “Safety is an individual, team and command responsibility”. This principle highlights the need for the individual to be committed to safety in our current context of the 3rd Generation RSAF. The necessity stems from the dynamic and uncertain characteristics prevalent in our organisation in these transformational years. In such an environment, there is a need for individuals to be able to draw from "First Principles", so that they may be able to react correctly and promptly in unknown situations. For the team, besides the normal working group/unit, I suggest that the S3, QMR and USO form the three key communities of practice (COP) and champion the areas of training, quality and safety respectively. Once these three COPs can get their act within their community together, and can cooperate and coordinate activities with other COPs, the three aspect of safety, training and quality will enter a “reinforcing loop” (see Figure 2) and be self-sustaining to achieve all missions tasked to the squadron safely. These COPs form another layer at the team level to fulfill the safety principle of “safety is an individual, team and command responsibility”. One of the safety principles is “zero accident is an achievable goal”. To many people, this is not a realistic target and will not be achievable. However, I shared this perspective with my squadron during one of the squadron's safety day. When it comes to individual being at risk, we always hold the mindset that “it will never happen to me”. That is why we take risks when it comes to drink driving and having unprotected sex, just to name a few. When we think “it will never happen to me”, we in fact, already subscribe to the 22 principle that “zero accident is achievable”; In this case, the “accident” being the risk that we are prepared to take. When this “zero accident is achievable” is applied to work safety, we think this is impossible. Instead, we subscribe to the fact that “accident” is possible, even, inevitable. I call this the “zero accident paradox”: zero accident is impossible but on the other hand, no accident would happen to me. Therefore, I suggest that the next time we very quickly dismiss that zero accident is not achievable, we should challenge ourselves to think in the same way “it will never happen to me”, if you take the precaution truly required. My final safety reflection is that safety cannot be achieved through fear, at least not in the long term. The third safety principles states that “incident reporting is mandatory for accident prevention”. The RSAF Safety Information System (SIS) has been in place since Jul 96, providing management and working levels with safety information (by posting FAIRs/GAIRs via the OA system) and statistical data for analysis. FAIR/GAIR essentially serves the purpose of open reporting and lessons sharing. The RSAF Safety Management Manual (RSMM) states that there should not be any need to apportion blame or mitigate errors, nor should it be used to question actions taken in an open system. Disciplinary and supervisory matters remain a command responsibility. However, I suspect that many incidents are not reported because the parties involved were fearful of the punishment that they might receive for openly reporting mistakes or incidents. Therefore, how to balance a open reporting culture and at the same time, accord the appropriate disciplinary actions, remains tricky. Another problem with instilling fear in order to be safe is that we might fall into negative vision. An example of negative vision is that when we are told not to think of “pink flamingo”, the first thought that usually come across our mind is the picture of a “pink flamingo”. Therefore, the more we fear something that might compromise the safe execution of our tasks, the more we think of that fear. As a result, instead of achieving the mission, we tend to fall into the trap of negative vision and ended up infringing safety. One way out of this is to focus our energy on getting proper training and performing the task consistently. Instead of fear, we should respect the operating environment and demonstrate professional pride in executing all tasks that we undertake. Quality Emphasis - Doing Things Consistently Quality is about doing things consistently well. It is about doing things consistent with standards prescribed in unit's standard operating procedures (SOP), standing orders and logistics orders (e.g. AFLO, Sqn FLO). Certainly, quality is much more than the annual audit checks by external auditors. Quality emphasis is to make sure that people perform their tasks consistently what they have learned from their training. The RSAF Air Logistics Organisation's (ALO) quality journey has been the hallmark of its work culture of continuous improvement where "Quality is everybody's responsibility". It is commendable that various air logistics business units have been admitted into the Singapore Quality Class (SQC) since ALO was certified to ISO 9002 in 1993. Its quality auditing activities have also moved beyond “quality control” to “quality assurance”. But what is crucial for an operational unit is for its personnel to see the operational benefits of what “quality work” means. I should think this “personal internalisation”, where a person understands fully his impact as an individual, is the more difficult part. Individual operators must understand that operating consistently means that it will be easier to transfer experience and continuously improve the techniques, tactics or procedures to accomplish our missions. In light of this, it is essential for the “operations documents” (SOP and standing orders, etc.) to have a proper “management system” to catch up with the way we maintain the logistics orders. This means having up to date SOP and standing orders that consistently 23 RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 51 apr 07 capture the “right” way of performing unit's tasks. It also means that the execution of operational and daily administrative tasks will be of consistent quality. Individuals who find these “operations documents” lacking should highlight them to the squadron's management so as to get them updated. It is then for the squadron's management to continuously review the these documents. Since 1st Apr 06, Logistics Inspection Branch (LIB) has been created in AFI to bring both the Logistics Safety and Quality Management Systems audits on all RSAF units under the command responsibility of CAF through HAFI. This indicates AFI's “inspection mandate” has moved beyond operations and safety to include quality at the squadron level as well. The Squadon's Quality Management Representative (QMR), being responsible for making sure that the unit maintain a good quality management system and records, is also in a good position to assist and advise the squadron in managing the unit's “operations document”. In the ADA units, the vision is to have all the Sqn Chief WO be the QMR. This will further strengthen the quality emphasis with operational benefits, since being the most senior specialist in the squadron, the Sqn Chief WO will have wealth of both operational and quality knowledge relevant to the Sqn's weapon systems. Training Emphasis - Doing Things Correctly Training is about doing things correctly. It is about making sure that everyone is trained to do the required job properly; be it a driver, a specialist or an officer running his daily ops or non-ops tasks. It is vital to emphasise training because we sometimes take training for granted since we are already doing our respective jobs day-in, dayout. The emphasis on training is to make sure that we equip our men and women the necessary skills to perform their tasks correctly. The training time for both the NSF and NSmen has been shortened due to the implementation of the 2-year NSF training and 10-year NSTS respectively. However, a shorter time for training need not be at the expense of standards (quality) and safety. Nevertheless, it will require a different mindset to accomplish it. Training must become more focused and we should be training “just enough” versus the old model of “just in case”. A more focused training with emphasis on standards and safety will ensure that the personnel in the unit ask themselves whether they are trained to the level that they can perform their tasks adequately. Though the focus for unit personnel is to accomplish all assigned missions, we still must dedicate sufficient time to continuously train those who are not up to the standard as yet. The “training the trainer” concept could be adopted in the unit. Though, due to the tight manpower resources, it is difficult to ensure that anyone that has to do some form of training be “certified” to perform the training tasks. However, it must be stressed that we must be conscious of the important role we have in making sure that the personnel under us are properly trained; that is, trained to do things correctly, proficient up to a level consistent with required standards and able to perform the job safely. 24 In the case of the unit, the regulars are probably in the best positions to be the trainer. Usually, the regulars will stay longer in the unit. They must have also been through the unit entire training cycle and at least have been keeping current by the SATR (semi-annual training requirement). How to instill in them that they do have a training role to play in the unit is essential. The best person for this task has to be the unit S3 (or equivalent appointment holder). The unit S3, besides running the daily ops for the squadron, must also pay enough attention in making sure that the “trainers” are sufficiently equipped, and that the rest of the training within the unit are conducted correctly. Changing Safety Mindset Changing of safety mindset offers another perspectives to looking at safety related issues. It targets at leveraging at the “mental models level” of the Level of Perspective (LOP) framework (see Figure 4). There is an appropriate action mode at each level of perspectives. For example, at the events level, the reactive mode is most effective as the situation demands us to take quick decisive actions to tackle it immediately. But for safety, especially in the long run, we cannot be reactive and take knee-jerk reactions all the time. Besides being adaptive to various safety “patterns over time” and creating various structures and policies to ensure safety, we must also challenge many of our mental model (mindset) with regards to safety. Conclusion What I have reflected are mainly safety related issues that are not just on safety alone. They include areas of training and quality as well. In summary, the key is that every CO should have some form of framework/mental model/theory to think about safety. This will form the basis for his actions when dealing with issues related to safety. It is also important that with an articulated framework, he can then discuss it with his PSOs and senior personnel. This will help them understand where the CO is coming from when certain decisions related to safety are taken by him. The framework can also be the basis for discussion, and allow unit personnel to “test” it before it becomes part of the unit safety culture. A common thread in the many issues that I have reflected is about changing mindset (or mental model) as well. We need to surface and test some of our inherent safety mental model (mindset) through reflecting together. We could then “dissolves” many of the safety related issues that we have been trying to solve. References: 1. http://intranet.defence.gov.sg/Organisation/Air_Force/ALD/Quality_And_Safety/Quality_ Journey/index.htm 2. http://afi.rsaf.mindef/afi/index.htm 3. RSAF Safety Management Manual 25 RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 51 apr 07 2WO Tommy Low is currently the Safety Publicity Warrant Officer in Accident Prevention Branch, Air Force Inspectorate, HQ RSAF. He was previously a PSTAR Platoon Sergeant in 3rd Divisional Air Defence Artillery Battalion. 2WO Tommy is also an avid photographer and has contributed to the RSAF in numerous events, including NDPs, RSAF Anniversaries, etc. He attained his Industrial Technician Certificate in Mechatronics from ITE Tampines in 2000. 26 magazine calendar poster website oa wallpaper notebook car decal photography videography Introduction Being an Air Defence Systems Specialist means I am wearing green and out in the field most of the time. And as a PSTAR specialist, my role was to assist my Tactical Control Officer in surveying the airspace designated to us by higher HQ. And eventually designating hostile targets to the Fire Units under our control. For the record, I joined the Air Force in 1993 and stayed throughout my first 10 years in the Air Defence community, rising through the ranks and appointments in the ADA Formation. My last appointment in 3rd Divisional Air Defence Artillery Battalion was as a PSTAR Platoon Sergeant, in 2002. Post-9/11 has changed the overall defence concept of the entire world's military. We are not fighting the conventional warfare anymore. With terrorist threats abound, military all over the world will now have to face their adversities in a whole new dimension. Air Defence has taken more of the “limelight” after 9/11, as we now not only have to defend our skies from conventional threats, but also the unconventional ones as well. With such emphasis on Operations, Safety definitely must not be neglected. Safety Overview in the RSAF I was posted to Air Force Inspectorate (AFI) in 2002. Residing in my cubicle in AFI for the past 4 and a half years has enlightened me with how Safety in the RSAF works. AFI is the Safety Organisation of the RSAF. Our core business is Accident Prevention, with the numerous Safety Programmes conducted by Accident Prevention Branch. The Analysis and Investigation Branch handles all the trends and analysis work in AFI, as well as investigation matters should an incident or accident occurs. The Inspection Branch has now been expanded into an Operations and a Logistics Inspection Branch, giving each branch more dedication in conducting their inspections of the units and squadrons. The 4 branches of AFI works towards the common goal of “Preventing the next accident through implementing a Robust Safety Management System with a Strong Safety Culture in the RSAF”. This is AFI's Mission. The open-reporting idealogy has been “drilled” into each and every RSAF personnel since Day-1, when they stepped into Air Force School. The basic course, the Specialist Enhancement Programme, the RSAF Safety Course, the Advance Specialist Course and many other RSAF courses have instilled the importance of safety and open-reporting. By being open about our “mistakes”, we will be able to educate the “rest”. Yes, all “mistakes” comes with a price to pay. But if we were to keep mum about our mistake and not reporting it, we will not be helping the next person doing that same particular job. In fact, we might even be causing a hazard to the next person. 27 RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 51 apr 07 Let's take an example of an uneven ground, which will probably caused someone who walks over it to trip. I walked across the spot and tripped, causing me to lose my balance. But if I were to walk away from it, thinking that the next guy will probably also just tripped, I might be wrong. The next guy walked over the ground, tripped and falls flat on his face, getting a deep cut over his eyebrow. Ouch! What could I have done? I could have prevented his accident, if only I had highlighted the uneven ground. Or I could have gone a step further to block off that path and put up a hazard sign, while informing management to get the ground fixed. That's just an example of an uneven ground. What if its a lost tool which was not reported and the technician involved wanting to “cover” himself, purchased a new tool to replace it. He may have gotten away with the accounting process, but where is that tool?! It might just caused the next accident if it was lying around somewhere. By believing in an open-reporting culture, we could all do our part and prevent the next incident/accident. When you believe, you will succeed. Safety Publicity in the RSAF As the Warrant Officer in-charge of Safety Publicity in the RSAF, my role is to ensure the RSAF gets the right safety messages, every time, always. Safety Publicity in the RSAF have a few means. We have the OA Wallpaper on your PCs, Safety Posters, AFI Safety Website, Safety Table Planners/Calendars and the Safety Magazine – Focus. 28 magazine calendar poster My job, as the assistant to the editor of Focus, is to capture the pictures to compliment the writers' article. And being an avid photographer does help. In fact, I have been honing on my photgraphy skills since. When I first stepped into this job, I was told I needed to have some know-hows on photography, graphic designs and magazine layouts. Hmm... Interesting job, I thought. And indeed it was very interesting. Much changes were done during my time as the Safety Publicity Specialist. Overhauling the Focus magazine's outlook and layout, re-designing the new Safety logo, churning out safety posters with new and updated pictures, just to name a few. The Focus magazine has come a long way. Since its early publication in the 70s till now, we seen a variety of changes to its cover and outlook. Our safety magazine reaches out not only to our RSAF personnel, but also to the foreign Air Forces as well. As such, we have to constantly keep the magazine “fresh” and “trendy”. This way, it will get a good chance that the “readership” for Focus increases. I have done my walkabouts in units & squadrons while I was on Focus assignments and had talks with the personnel there. Most agree that an attractive magazine cover and “interesting” titles of articles coupled with nice, beautiful pictures would “attract” the reader. And so I began my quest to beautify the magazine. Working closely with the magazine design company gives me the versatility to manipulate the outlook and layout. Let's be fair. The designer will not know the difference between a F-16 and a F-5. All they know is that its a plane. So I am there to “hold their hands” and ensure website oa wallpaper notebook car decal photography videography that the correct pictures are placed with the corresponding articles. The OA Wallpaper is another mean of safety publicity in the RSAF. AFI is the custodian of the RSAF's intranet OA wallpaper. The wallpaper safety messages are uploaded weekly to disseminate important safety messages to the entire RSAF. If you have an OA PC, you will definitely not missed that safety message wallpaper at the background of your monitor/LCD. The message may be brief, but the intent is definitely clear. The AFI Safety website has seen much transformation too. A more interactive and vibrant website now allows users to access more information about safety in the RSAF. CAF Quarterly Safety Forums slides, Safety Circulars, Safety Alert Messages, are some of the useful materials which could be found in the AFI Safety website. In this world of advanced technology, we should be making full use of it to our advantage, to share valuable information. The Safety Posters are produced by AFI annually. Posters are part and parcel of publicity and it also serves as a very good reminder for crews on the ground. Sometimes, its these reminders that will prevent an incident/accident, or even save a life. AFI also conducts Safety Poster Competitions bi-annually. This is a channel where our very own servicemen can showcase their creativity and provide the RSAF with quality suggestions on poster designs. Finally, the Safety Table Planners/Calendars. These planners/calendars are produced, at the end of the year, as part of the safety publicity awareness to the RSAF. Safety messages and slogans are printed on the planners to give users a touch of safety in their daily planning. Quotes from Chief of Air Force, Formation Commanders, HAFI and other RSAF officers serves as a reminder that Safety will be part of our daily operations. Conclusion After producing 17 and a half issues of Focus magazine (I joined midway through the production of issue #33), it’s time for me to relinquish my duties and return to my roots. I've learned to enjoy the work that was once so “alien” to me. But coming to Air Force Inspectorate has certainly widen my horizon and increased my knowledge about safety in the RSAF. Now, with the abundance of safety knowledge that I've acquired in AFI, I am sure I will be able to contribute to my new unit in Air Defence and Operations Command. Parting has never been easy, but I'd want to think that I have contributed to the transformation of Safety Publicity in the RSAF as good memories... 29 “ ...Safety does not only exist at the policy level. It depends heavily on how conscious and proactive are our people towards Safety... ” - BG Ng Chee Khern Chief of Air Force Annual Safety Conference 2007