"Risky business: Air-cargo service"

Sunday, July 16, 2006

Editorial
Risky business: Air-cargo service
The Miami (FL) Herald


Air cargo service in America is like a ticking time bomb. One day a cargo
plane - with an exhausted pilot or mechanical problem - will crash into a
crowded mall or school and kill scores of people. The Federal Aviation
Administration mustn't wait for such a tragedy to jump-start it into action.

Given air cargo's track record - one fatal crash per month on average since
2000 - the FAA should tighten the industry's safety rules and oversight now,
particularly for small cargo carriers that have the worst accident rates.

A Miami Herald investigative series - Deadly Express by Ronnie Greene -
described the air-cargo industry's troubled history. (To see the series
online, go to www.miami.com.) Among the findings:

   Air cargo is the deadliest segment of commercial aviation. Sixty-nine
fatal crashes since 2000 have taken 85 lives.

   The industry is hampered by aging planes, tight deadlines and overnight
flights. Pilots fly under extreme pressure to meet tough deadlines. Many get
paid only after the delivery.

   Pilots often fly in hazardous weather, sometimes without enough sleep.
Many fly planes that have mechanical problems, which is unthinkable in
passenger flights.

   Despite the problems, fewer FAA safety rules apply to cargo planes than
passenger planes. For example, cargo pilots can fly 40 percent more hours
per year; they are not required to have eight hours' rest 24 hours prior to
a flight, as are passenger pilots. Small cargo planes aren't required to
have ``black boxes'' that help determine the cause of a crash and can lead
to safety improvements.

   Lax enforcement only worsens safety concerns for cargo carriers. In many
cases, the FAA allows cargo firms to continue flying despite egregious
maintenance lapses and crash histories. For example, the FAA has yet to
ground one firm with four crashes involving seven deaths since 2002. That
Ohio firm, Grand Aire Express, and its affiliate TriCoastal Air Inc. have
had three dozen accidents or incidents since the 1980s, according to FAA
records.

In 2000, the FAA fined Grand Aire $290,000 for operating a plane for 20 days
without repairing a known problem and for other maintenance failures. Yet
the companies continue to fly and accidents continue to happen. The latest
crash took a pilot's life in February.

The FAA says it has to be cautious before grounding planes because of the
threat of lawsuits. Yet the cost of lawsuits, improved safety and more
stringent enforcement should be weighed against the potential loss of life
in the sky and on the ground.

The 1997 Fine Air cargo crash in Miami should have spurred FAA reforms. The
National Transportation Safety Board found Fine Air and its cargo loader at
fault. NTSB also blamed the FAA for not adequately monitoring Fine Air or
correcting ``known cargo-related deficiencies.'' In a pointed reprimand, the
NTSB said that the FAA ``contributed to the accident.''

By pilot skill or luck, that crash hit a vacant lot and exploded just short
of an industrial park west of Miami International Airport. The crash claimed
five lives, including one on the ground. The toll could have been much
worse. Had the plane come down just a little to the south, the plane could
have plunged into the Mall of the Americas. Had the flight gone east, it
could have exploded in dense residential neighborhoods or downtown Miami.

Public safety shouldn't have to rely on luck. The FAA says that its
resources are limited. Moreover, its mission to promote the aviation
industry may conflict with its mission to protect the flying public. Yet
there can be no excuse for indifference to the threat of a potentially
disastrous air-cargo crash. The FAA should take seriously its obligation to
prevent death from raining down from our skies.

 Do you have an opinion about this story?
Share it with other readers in our CAA Discussion Forums

http://www.californiaaviation.org/dcfp/dcboard.php


*****************************************