
Another great event that helped organizations and authorities to exchange and discuss. I was impressed by the active participation and the level of advancement of some organizations in the Part-IS implementation journey. Well done to all!
Join a community to be part of the discussion.
Goncalo Oliveira posted in Air Operations
Dear Air Operations experts,
In your view, can the AMC1 ORO.FC.115 (a) (2) CRM Classroom training be delivered through Microsoft Teams?
Thanks and regards
Carlos Sorel posted in Cybersecurity
Regarding IS.I.OR.235, I wonder how we should approach cases in which an airline belongs to a corporation or group of companies, and that this parent company is the one that provides them with information security services. Should we understand that these services are being subcontracted to a third party or, on the contrary, understand that they are being provided as their own by the airline, being part of the same group of companies?
Davide MARTINI commented on Vasileios PAPAGEORGIOU's topic in Cybersecurity
Another great event that helped organizations and authorities to exchange and discuss. I was impressed by the active participation and the level of advancement of some organizations in the Part-IS implementation journey. Well done to all!
Vasileios PAPAGEORGIOU created a topic in Cybersecurity
diomiro certaldi created a topic in Air Operations
Bastian Marx commented on Michel Masson's topic in Rotorcraft
Hello everyone,
Unfortunately the file cannot be downloaded.
There is a “You don't have permission to access this resource.” error.
John Straiton posted in Cybersecurity
From a newsletter I receive, perhaps a good example of the IS Insider Risk.
Pentagon Leaker Sentenced
Jack Teixeira, a former Massachusetts Air National Guard member who was arrested last year for leaking classified US military documents, was sentenced yesterday to 15 years in prison. The incident is considered the most extensive intelligence breach in at least a decade.
The sentencing comes after Teixeira, who turns 23 next month, pleaded guilty in March to six federal counts of willfully retaining and transmitting national defense information. In exchange for his plea, officials spared Teixeira from being charged with additional counts under the Espionage Act (see history\.
Teixeira was an information technology specialist who gained top-secret security clearance in 2021, two years after enlisting in the Air National Guard. Outside of worl<, he had been uploading a wide range of classified information, including about the war in Ukraine, to users on a Discord server (a gamer communication app) every week. The defense claimed Teixeira didn't mean to harm the US and was instead keeping his friends apprised of world events.
Santiago Madrona commented on a post in Air Operations
Dear aviation colleagues,
I would like to hear your thoughts on following topic regarding Low Visibility Operations.
According AMC3 SPA.LVO.100(b) Table 6 when performing CAT2 approach on a runway with 2 or more RVR assessment units one may be operative.
Imagine following scenario where the MID and ROLL OUT RVR assessment unit are U/S. You perform a landing distance computation and the calculated landing distance is within 2/3 of the landing distance available meaning you will not enter the third part of the runway.
Although the table states that only 1 RVR assessment unit can be U/S, you know that you don’t need the ROLL OUT RVR.
Is it allowed to perform the approach and so disregarding requirements in the Table 6, or will the airport not allow LVP’s when two RVR assessments units are U/S?
Thank you for your inputs/considerations.
Buenos días. En el escenario que planteas, hay dos medidores de RVR U/S. Al hacer los cálculos de performance y se estima que se aterrice en el los 2/3 de la pista, el RVR de 3/3 podría estar inoperativo, pero NO el del 2/3 ya que vas a aterrizar en ese tercio de la pista y lo necesitarías para el aterrizaje.
roberto ciocca commented on a post in Air Operations
Dear aviation colleagues,
I would like to hear your thoughts on following topic regarding Low Visibility Operations.
According AMC3 SPA.LVO.100(b) Table 6 when performing CAT2 approach on a runway with 2 or more RVR assessment units one may be operative.
Imagine following scenario where the MID and ROLL OUT RVR assessment unit are U/S. You perform a landing distance computation and the calculated landing distance is within 2/3 of the landing distance available meaning you will not enter the third part of the runway.
Although the table states that only 1 RVR assessment unit can be U/S, you know that you don’t need the ROLL OUT RVR.
Is it allowed to perform the approach and so disregarding requirements in the Table 6, or will the airport not allow LVP’s when two RVR assessments units are U/S?
Thank you for your inputs/considerations.
In my opinion having 2 reports pts below mins represent an high probability of having the touch down soon as well blow minimum.
Thus 2 reports abv minimum should be available
Davide MARTINI commented on a post in Cybersecurity
Excited to join the EASA Cybersecurity Community!
Welcome!
Fernando Barquilla Mogollón commented on a post in Air Operations
Dear aviation colleagues,
I would like to hear your thoughts on following topic regarding Low Visibility Operations.
According AMC3 SPA.LVO.100(b) Table 6 when performing CAT2 approach on a runway with 2 or more RVR assessment units one may be operative.
Imagine following scenario where the MID and ROLL OUT RVR assessment unit are U/S. You perform a landing distance computation and the calculated landing distance is within 2/3 of the landing distance available meaning you will not enter the third part of the runway.
Although the table states that only 1 RVR assessment unit can be U/S, you know that you don’t need the ROLL OUT RVR.
Is it allowed to perform the approach and so disregarding requirements in the Table 6, or will the airport not allow LVP’s when two RVR assessments units are U/S?
Thank you for your inputs/considerations.
As it is not relevant, it is not required. So only one RVR would be enough.
John Franklin created a topic in Rotorcraft
Gian Andrea Bandieri created a topic in Cybersecurity
Mike Gahan posted in Cybersecurity
Have the really bad guys caused us to forget “internal innocent” cyber threats?
While we focus - importantly - on the malicious and intentionally targeted cyber threats, we should not forget those from internal and innocent sources.
Look back at the recent aviation cyber incidents in the public domain: FAA NOTAM system in early 2023, UK NATS reduced system availability in Mid 2023,
Norway, the October 2023 Optus shutdown in Australia and consider if more comprehensive testing of software changes before being promoted to operational platforms and regression testing might have averted, or at least minimised, the impacts of these events.
MJG
Peter Jacobs posted in Cybersecurity
Excited to join the EASA Cybersecurity Community!
Andrew Farrugia posted in General Aviation
Morning all - interested to hear your views about aircraft private ownership with possible rental to local fliers and/or trusted hour builders. What is the stance of EASA in the GA world.
Janick Cox commented on a post in General Aviation
Probably there is currently a bug in circulating the updated TCDS for P2012 - I did receive it 17 (!) times since yesterday evening (starting at 1717Z)!?
Dear Klaus-Dieter,
Thanks for the feedback and we are aware that some subscribers have received multiple notifications of this publication. We stopped these notifications yesterday around 12:00 and found the cause of the issue. The developers are testing the fix in the testing environment and it will be released to the live website afterwards so this cannot happen again. We apologise for the inconvenience.
Klaus-Dieter Joras posted in General Aviation
Probably there is currently a bug in circulating the updated TCDS for P2012 - I did receive it 17 (!) times since yesterday evening (starting at 1717Z)!?
Thomas Hytten created an event in General Aviation
Vasileios PAPAGEORGIOU created a topic in Cybersecurity