CAA sets the record straight on SAX grounding

THE South African Civil
Aviation Authority has
spoken out about safety
concerns that led to the
grounding of SAX earlier this
month, refuting accusations
that political pressure resulted
in the SACAA allowing the
airline to take flight only one
day later.
On April 19 and 20, SACAA
conducted an audit of SAX
operations. The focus of the
inspection was on in-flight
occurrences reported by
the operator’s crew through
Air Traffic and Navigation
Services (ATNS). The aim
was to seek reassurance
that the incidents had been
adequately addressed by
SAX, spokesperson of SACAA,
Kabelo Ledwaba, told TNW.
“To the regulator’s
surprise, SAX could not
produce records relating to
the reported occurrences.
That automatically raised
alarms regarding their safety
management systems and
procedures. The question
was: why was the airline not
able to account for all the
reported occurrences? How
could they claim to be safe
when they are not even aware
of incidents that happened
during a flight? How do they
know when a deficiency is
serious enough and warrants
that an aircraft be sent to the
workshop for repairs?”
The airline had until
April 29 to provide the
regulator with an action
plan detailing how they were
to address the identified
concerns, Kabelo says, which
the airline did. However, the
proposed action plan was
unfortunately found to be
inadequate, he adds, saying
a meeting was held the same
evening between SACAA
and SAX technical teams.
“It was clear that the SAX
team was not in a position
to offer the required level of
safety assurance regarding
their operations.” SACAA then
took a decision to withdraw
the airline’s Air Operator
Certificate.
“Any insinuation that
suggests that the suspension
was an impromptu decision
is misguided. The operator
had about ten days to engage
SACAA in order to get clarity
and the requisite assistance
that would have helped
them to produce a realistic
corrective action plan. It is
important to clarify that from
the onset; the [airline] knew
the consequences of not
submitting an acceptable
action plan addressing the
audit findings.”
Kabelo explains the
suspension was not
a reprisal; it was a
precautionary measure aimed
at avoiding catastrophic
incidences. “There is never an
appropriate time to suspend
operations. SACAA will always
take immediate action on
any matter that threatens
aviation security and safety
because aviation tragedies
usually happen with little or
no warning.”
Claims that the SACAA
approved SAX’s license to
fly due to political pressure
are “simply not true”, says
Kabelo. “SACAA’s principle
is to engage with the license
holders and no one else,”
he says, adding that civil
aviation regulations make no
distinction between public or
privately-owned operators.
Kabelo also addressed
remarks that suggested
SACAA is “obsessed with
paper work”. “The nature of
SACAA’s work revolves around
evidence and records. ‘Paper
work’ is important and serves
as the necessary evidence
required in line with civil
aviation regulations.”
While the suspension
of SAX has been lifted,
SACAA will continue to
monitor and oversee the
full implementation of SAX’s
corrective action plan, says
Kabelo. The regulator has
started intensifying its
oversight of the airline’s entire
operation, he says.
Spokesperson of SAX,
Refilwe Masemola, says
SAX is in continuous
correspondence with SACAA
to ensure the airline meets
SACAA’s requirements.
“SAX holds the safety of its
passengers with the highest
regard. The reason we have
been without incident over the
last 22 years is testament
to that fact. We would never
compromise on safety
standards for the sake of
commercial gain.”