STUDENT NAME:

STUDENT ID. NO.:

Safety, Security and Emergency Planning
SCHOOL OF COURSE NAME:
ENGINEERING ISSUE DATE: 13-Mar-23, Monday
SUBMISSION DATE: 06-Apr-23, Thursday
MARK & FEEDABCK DATE: 27-Apr-23, Thursday
MARK & FEEDBACK METHOD:
27-Apr-23, Thursday
via Moodle

ASSIGNMENT 1 COVER SHEET

OUTCOMES (Please tick the relevant outcomes)

Demonstrate an understanding of the regulatory framework underpinning safety and
✔ LO1 security operations in the aviation industry.
Critically assess the consequences for human aspects of the air travel devices and
✔ LO2 procedures required to achieve safety in the air and on the ground.
Evaluate the use of a variety of rules and technology in the pursuit of aviation
LO3 security.

LO4 Design a contingency (aircraft disaster) plan exercising appropriate judgment.

RESULT
GRADING OVERALL

Q1 /55

Q2 /25

Structure /20

TOTAL %

Assessor’s Feedback:

Feedback Received:
I certify that the work contained within this quiz is all my
own work.
Student Signature:
Date:
Student Signature: Date:

Assessor’s Name: Dr Crystal Ioannou Signature: Date:

 School of Engineering
Safety Security and Emergency Planning

Introduction:
Part 1:
Regulatory framework for safety:
Regulatory framework for security:
Regulatory framework for accident investigation:
Human Factors in aviation safety:
Importance of human factors:
Accident causation model:
Conclusion Part 1:
Part 2:
Passenger screening devices:
Passenger screening procedures:
Consequences of screeding devices and procedures on passengers:
Evaluation of existing devices and procedures of screening:
Conclusion part 2:
References:

Assignment 1 Page 1 of 3
 School of Engineering
Safety Security and Emergency Planning

Introduction:

Regulation, technology, and human factors all play a part in the complex and multifaceted notion of aviation
safety (Kelly, 2019). Several issues pertaining to flight safety have been covered in this chat, including the
regulatory environment, safety management systems, aviation security, accident inquiry, and passenger screening
practises. We start by talking about the legal framework governing aviation safety, particularly the regulations set
forth by the European Aviation Safety Agency. (EASA). We also looked at the idea of safety management
systems (SMS) and how crucial they are to avoiding mishaps and enhancing all-around safety in the aviation
sector. In terms of human factors, we have looked at the devices and practices used for airport passenger
screening, as well as their possible effects and repercussions on travellers. In order to highlight the various
elements that can add to accidents in the aviation sector, we have also discussed the accident causation model and
looked at a case study accident from Skybrary. Finally, we assessed and critically analysed the use of current
screening tools and practises at airports, emphasising issues with privacy, efficacy, and user experience.

Part 1:

Regulatory framework for safety:

To guarantee the highest degree of safety for aviation operations, goods, and services, the regulatory framework
for aviation safety was created. The Safety Management System (SMS), a proactive method of handling aviation
safety, is a crucial component of this framework (Ellis, 2021). Aviation service providers are required by the
regulatory framework to adopt an SMS to detect and reduce safety risks. The SMS uses a systematic strategy to
safety management, which includes setting safety goals, identifying risks and hazards, and putting risk controls in
place. In order to implement SMS in all facets of aviation, such as air operations, control of air traffic, and
maintenance, EASA has established regulatory standards. These rules mandate that aviation service providers
adopt an SMS in accordance with global norms, including Annex 19 of the ICAO (Kim, 2019). The creation of
safety policy and goals, the identification of safety risks and hazards, the application of risk controls, the delivery
of security education, the reporting of safety incidents, and the evaluation of safety data are all part of the
regulatory requirements for SMS. For aviation service providers to adopt and sustain a successful SMS, in
addition to the rules and regulations, EASA also offers advice and support. This covers the creation of standard
procedures, the delivery of instruction and training, and the exchange of data and information regarding safety.

Regulatory framework for security:

The goal of the legal framework governing aviation security is to guarantee the safety and security of travellers,
personnel, and aircraft. A variety of rules, directives, and protocols are included in the framework to stop illicit
activities such as acts of terror, sabotage, and hijacking (Glukhov, 2017). A thorough aviation security programme
is created and implemented in collaboration with national aviation agencies by the European Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA). The programme contains rules for airport security, air cargo security, traveller and luggage
screening, and security instruction.

The following are the main legal structures relating to aviation security:

● The European Union's legislative framework for aviation security is established by the EU Aviation
Security Regulation. (EU). It lays out the standards for airport security, flying cargo security, passenger
and bag screening, and other aviation security measures.

Assignment 1 Page 2 of 3
 School of Engineering
Safety Security and Emergency Planning

● A national aviation security programme outlining the precise security measures implemented at airports
under its authority must be developed by each EU Member State.
● Standards and guidelines for screening of passengers and bags at airports have been established by EASA
rules. The use of security screening tools, training of security staff, and handling of prohibited things are
all covered by the rules.
● Regulations created by EASA specify the standards for secure aviation cargo. These rules address the
inspection of air cargo, the handling of suspicious items, and the safety of the supply networks for air
cargo (Cunha, 2017).
● Security training for aviation employees, such as airport security staff, flight crew, and ground handling
staff, has been governed by EASA regulations. In accordance with the regulations, security training
providers must be certified and security training programmes must meet certain standards and criteria.

Regulatory framework for accident investigation:

The purpose of the legal structure governing accident investigations is to guarantee that the cause of mishaps in
the aviation sector is determined and that safeguards are put in place to avoid recurring incidents. A thorough
framework for accident investigations has been developed and is being put into place by the European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) in collaboration with national agencies (Xue, 2018). The following are the main legal
structures that affect accident investigations:

● The European Union's legal framework for accident inquiry is established by the EU Accident inquiry
Regulation. (EU). It lays out the requirements for the investigation process and the reporting of results,
and it mandates that EU Member States look into accidents and serious incidents involving aircraft.
● Each EU Member State is needed to create a national accident investigation programme outlining the
precise steps and protocols for accidents under its purview.
● The gathering and retention of proof the evaluation of information and facts, and the creation of reports
are all covered by the standards for aviation accident investigations that EASA has established.
● Regulations for the creation and distribution of accident investigation reports have also been created by
EASA. These regulations specify the procedure for notifying pertinent stakeholders of the results and call
for accurate, thorough, and timely reports.
● Frameworks for accident investigations are created to encourage ongoing safety improvements in the
aircraft sector. The results of accident inquiries are used to pinpoint safety hazards and create safeguards
against future occurrences of incidents of this nature.

Human Factors in aviation safety:

Because they can affect the behaviour of pilots, air traffic controllers, technicians, and other aviation
professionals, human factors are essential to aviation safety. The goal of the study of human factors is to
comprehend how people engage with the aviation system, such as the tools, setting, and procedures. Aviation
experts can take action to prevent mistakes and raise the level of safety in the sector by comprehending how
human factors can impact it. A variety of subjects are covered in the area of human factors in aviation safety,
including communication, situational awareness, decision-making, and crew resource management.

Importance of human factors:

Because they have a big influence on how well aviation professionals perform and make decisions, human factors
are essential to ensuring aviation safety (Patankar, 2017). Miscommunication, exhaustion, tension, or a lack of
contextual awareness are examples of human errors that can result in events, mishaps, or other safety risks.
Aviation personnel can take proactive steps to prevent mistakes and enhance safety by having a thorough grasp of
human factors and their effect on aviation safety. Aviation safety can be increased through the use of human

Assignment 1 Page 3 of 3
 School of Engineering
Safety Security and Emergency Planning

factors, such as efficient employee resource management (CRM). CRM can assist aviation workers in identifying
and mitigating risks prior to them turning into safety hazards by prioritising efficient interaction, collaboration,
and decision-making (Stanton, 2019). Similar to how fatigue-related errors—which are an integral component of
incidents and mishaps in the aircraft industry—can be avoided by implementing fatigue management
programmes.

Accident causation model:

The framework provided by the accident causation model aids investigators in determining the underlying causes
of an aviation mishap. The model is predicated on the idea that mishaps rarely result from a single cause but rather
frequently come about as a result of a series of circumstances, each of which influences the outcome (Grant,
2018). The model aids detectives in locating these elements and formulating suggestions for mitigating similar
mishaps in the future. The Swiss Cheese model (Larouzee, 2020) and the Human Factors Analysis and
Classification System (Small, 2020) are two of the most frequently employed mishap causation models in
aviation. (HFACS). The Swiss Cheese model explains how a system's different layers of defence can malfunction
and cause an accident. Organisational, supervisory, preconditional, and unsafe actions are the four major
categories of human factors identified by HFACS, which focuses on human error.

The 2005 collision of West Caribbean Airways Flight 708 is an illustration of a mishap that could be examined
using the accident causation model. All 160 occupants of the aircraft died as a consequence of the accident, which
took place in Venezuela's mountains. Investigators determined that the flight crew's insufficient instruction and
oversight, the aircraft's poor maintenance, and a lack of regulatory authority were all contributing factors to the
mishap. Using the Swiss Cheese model, investigators were able to pinpoint the failures of the layers of defence in
the aviation system, such as the failure of the airline to provide sufficient training and oversight, the failure of the
maintenance department to maintain the aircraft as required, and the failure of the regulatory authorities to
recognise and address these problems.

Conclusion Part 1:

Aviation safety is a complicated and multifaceted problem that necessitates a thorough knowledge of the various
laws and regulations and accident-causing factors. In order to improve aviation safety, it is important to address
human variables like communication, fatigue, and decision-making. Doing so can greatly lower the likelihood of
mishaps and incidents. The accident causation model offers investigators a helpful framework for determining the
underlying causes of accidents and formulating suggestions to avoid repeat incidents. Aviation specialists can
work to improve safety and lower the risk of accidents and incidents by constantly assessing incidents and
carrying out advancements in the aviation industry. In the end, guaranteeing aviation safety requires a complete
strategy that incorporates efficient rules and regulations, human factors aspects, accident investigation and
analysis.

Part 2:

Passenger screening devices:

A variety of tools are used by airports all over the globe to screen travellers for security. These tools aid in the
detection of potential dangers like explosives, weapons, or restricted things and serve to protect both passengers
and airline employees. The metal detector, which finds items made of metal on a person's body, is one of the most

Assignment 1 Page 4 of 3
 School of Engineering
Safety Security and Emergency Planning

frequently used tools (Skorupski, 2018). Passengers must pass through the metal detector, and if the alert goes off,
they might also have to go through a pat-down search or additional screening. Carry-on baggage screening
frequently involves using X-ray machines (Stephan, 2021). Security employees may detect any potential threats
by using these devices, which use low-level radiation to generate a photograph of what's inside of the luggage.
Passengers are searched for concealed objects using cutting-edge imaging techniques such as millimetre wave
scanning and backscatter X-ray scanners (National Academies Press, 2018). These gadgets produce a detailed
picture of the human body, which can assist in the detection of potential threats that might be hidden beneath
clothing. Passengers are also subjected to explosives detection procedures using tools like sniffer canines and
trace detectors. Trace detectors take samples from a person's hands, luggage, or garments with a swab and analyse
them to see if there are any explosives present. Sniffing dogs can identify possible threats with speed and accuracy
because they are trained to recognise the scent of explosives.

Passenger screening procedures:

To protect the security of travellers, airline employees, and the general public, airport security protocols have been
put in place. According to the airport and the nation, the processes for scanning travellers at airports may differ
slightly, but they generally follow the same steps. Before being permitted to enter the airport, passengers must
show legitimate travel paperwork, such as a valid passport or ID card. Once at the security checkpoint, they must
take off any jewellery, watches, belts, or other metal items from their person and put them in a tray to be inspected
separately. Additionally, passengers must take off their shoes and put them in a tray, as well as any electronics
that are bigger than a smartphone, as these are subject to a separate screening process. In a tray, carry-on luggage
is also put for X-ray screening. A passenger may be subject to additional screening, such as a pat-down check or a
more thorough scan using sophisticated imaging technology, if they set off the metal detector or if security staff
notice anything suspicious while conducting the initial screening.Passengers may occasionally be chosen at
random or based on other considerations, such as their travel history or behaviour, for extra screening. This might
entail a more thorough examination of their body and belongings. Passengers may also be screened using
explosives detection devices, such as trace detectors and sniffer dogs (Kierzkowski, 2021).

Consequences of screeding devices and procedures on passengers:

In terms of human variables, the use of tools and practises for passenger screening at airports may have a big
impact on travellers. First of all, the screening procedure may cause passengers worry, anxiety, and discomfort.
Feelings of humiliation and invasion of privacy can result from the removal of private items like shoes and belts
as well as the possibility of extra screening. Second, the use of sophisticated imaging technology, like millimetre
wave scanners, can worry travellers who may feel uneasy with the level of precision and possible body exposure.
Thirdly, the screening procedure may take a while and can lead to delays, which may frustrate and inconvenience
travellers (Manna, 2017). Fourthly, passengers may experience anxiety as a result of the use of explosives
detection devices such as trace detectors and sniffer dogs. They may worry about being wrongly accused or
erroneously labelled as a potential danger. Last but not least, the adoption of security measures may have an
impact on how passengers feel about the airline or airport as a whole (Wattanacharoensil, 2022).

Evaluation of existing devices and procedures of screening:

Aviation security, passenger safety, and airline crew safety depend on the use of equipment and processes for
screening people at airports. However, there are a number of issues and issues with the technologies and
techniques being used now for passenger screening. The privacy and respect of passengers while they are being

Assignment 1 Page 5 of 3
 School of Engineering
Safety Security and Emergency Planning

screened is one of the main issues. The level of detail and possible exposure of the human body in the use of
sophisticated imaging techniques, such as millimetre wave scanners, has drawn criticism, raising worries about
privacy violations. Passengers may also feel uneasy and anxious due to the removal of personal things and the
possibility of additional screening. The possibility for false positives or negatives during the examination
procedure is another issue. Passengers who might be incorrectly identified as potential threats or who might miss
their flight due to prolonged screening may experience delays, inconveniences, and irritation as a result. The
dependability and efficiency of the most recent screening devices are also issues. For instance, accuracy and the
possibility of false positives or denials have been criticised with regard to explosives detection systems like trace
detectors and sniffing canines. Additionally, the adoption of security measures may have an impact on how
passengers feel about the airline or airport as a whole.

Conclusion part 2:

There is a need for ongoing research and development of enhanced methods and technologies for screening
travellers that emphasise both security and passenger satisfaction in view of concerns and criticisms. In order to
lessen the negative effects on passengers, additional measures should be taken, such as enhancing communication,
disseminating concise details, and making sure the screening procedures are carried out in a courteous and
effective way. While it is essential for aviation security to use the current tools and techniques for passenger
screening, there are valid worries and criticisms about their efficacy, dependability, and effects on the traveller
experience. The importance of passenger confidentiality, respect for one and ease should be prioritised while
ongoing improvements are made to these procedures and technologies.

References:

da Cunha, D.A., Macário, R. and Reis, V., 2017. Keeping cargo security costs down: A risk-based approach to air
cargo airport security in small and medium airports. Journal of Air Transport Management, 61, pp.115-122.

Ellis, K.K., Krois, P., Koelling, J., Prinzel, L.J., Davies, M. and Mah, R., 2021. A Concept of Operations
(ConOps) of an in-time aviation safety management system (IASMS) for Advanced Air Mobility (AAM). In
AIAA Scitech 2021 Forum (p. 1978).

Glukhov, G., Kirpichev, I., Nikonov, V., Maslennikova, G. and Konyaev, E., 2017. Creation of a state system for
continuous monitoring of aviation security in compliance with the international requirements. International
Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 8(11), pp.695-713.

Grant, E., Salmon, P.M., Stevens, N.J., Goode, N. and Read, G.J., 2018. Back to the future: What do accident
causation models tell us about accident prediction?. Safety Science, 104, pp.99-109.

Kelly, D. and Efthymiou, M., 2019. An analysis of human factors in fifty controlled flight into terrain aviation
accidents from 2007 to 2017. Journal of safety research, 69, pp.155-165.

Kierzkowski, A. and Kisiel, T., 2021. Feasibility of Reducing Operator-to-Passenger Contact for Passenger
Screening at the Airport with Respect to the Power Consumption of the System. Energies, 14(18), p.5943.

Kim, W.Y., Ahn, J. and Choi, Y.J., 2019. A Study on Priority of Aviation Safety Oversight Inspection Elements.
Journal of the Korean Society for Aviation and Aeronautics, 27(3), pp.90-97.

Larouzee, J. and Le Coze, J.C., 2020. Good and bad reasons: The Swiss cheese model and its critics. Safety
science, 126, p.104660.

Assignment 1 Page 6 of 3
 School of Engineering
Safety Security and Emergency Planning

Manna, S., Biswas, S., Kundu, R., Rakshit, S., Gupta, P. and Barman, S., 2017, June. A statistical approach to
predict flight delay using gradient boosted decision tree. In 2017 International conference on computational
intelligence in data science (ICCIDS) (pp. 1-5). IEEE.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2018. Airport passenger screening using millimeter
wave machines: Compliance with guidelines. National Academies Press.

Patankar, M.S. and Taylor, J.C., 2017. Applied human factors in aviation maintenance. Taylor & Francis.

Skorupski, J. and Uchroński, P., 2018. Evaluation of the effectiveness of an airport passenger and baggage
security screening system. Journal of Air Transport Management, 66, pp.53-64.

Small, A., 2020. Human factors analysis and classification system (HFACS): as applied to Asiana airlines flight
214. The Journal of Purdue Undergraduate Research, 10(1), p.18.

Stanton, N.A., Li, W.C. and Harris, D., 2019. Ergonomics and human factors in aviation. Ergonomics, 62(2),
pp.131-137.

Stephan, K.D. and Shmatov, M.L., 2021. Hazards to Aircraft Crews, Passengers, and Equipment from
Thunderstorm-Generated X-rays and Gamma-Rays. Radiation, 1(3), pp.162-173.

Wattanacharoensil, W., Fakfare, P. and Graham, A., 2022. Airportscape and its effect on airport sense of place
and destination image perception. Tourism Review, 77(2), pp.549-569.

Xue, Y. and Fu, G., 2018. A modified accident analysis and investigation model for the general aviation industry:
Emphasizing on human and organizational factors. Journal of safety research, 67, pp.1-15.

Assignment 1 Page 7 of 3