FOCUS - MINDEF

RSAF Safety Magazine Issue 73 | October 2012

FOCUS

2

>> Operationalising The G550-AEW: An Ops Perspective >> Operationalising The G550-AEW: An Aircraft Generation Perspective >> The H-450 Journey >> Expanding Capabilities Through Creating Capacity >> Expanding Capabilities: A Safety Officer’s Perspective

Inside:

Issue 73Republic of Singapore Air Force Safety MagazineFOCUS

Mission Success Safety Always - Mission Success Safety Always - Mission Success Safety Always - Mission Success Safety Always - Mission Success

Mission Success Safety Always - Mission Success Safety Always - Mission Success Safety Always - Mission Success Safety Always - Mission Success

Oct

ober

201

2

OPERATIONALISING CAPABILITIES


EDITORIAL BOARD

ChairmanCOL Aw Kwee Siong

MembersLTC Alex CorneliusME6 Lee Lip KeeMAJ Peter HoMAJ Tay Kok AnnCPT(DR) Magdalene LeeCPT Sidney NeoMs Audrey Siah

Production Crew

MAJ Khoo Pak SynEditor

Assistant / Photographer2WO Steven Goh

Printed ByVaCAIN Design Pte Ltd

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. Contributuons by way of articles, cartoons, sketches and photographs are welcome as are comments and criticisms.

FOCUS magazine is available on these sites:

http://webhosting.intranet.defence.gov.sg/web/AirForce/AFI/index.htm (intranet)

http://www.mindef.gov.sg/rsaf (internet)

ISO 9001:2008 BS OHSAS 18001:2007

Front Cover Image: H450 UAV taking off for a training sortie.

FOCUS Issue 73 - October 2012

3 Operationalising The G550-AEW: An Ops Perspective

6 17Operationalising TheG550-AEW: An Aircraft Generation Perspective

Expanding Capabilities Through Creating Capacity

2 Foreword By COL Aw Kwee Siong, Head Air Force Inspectorate

12 The H-450 Journey By LTC Chiun Koon Wee, CO 116 SQN

23 Expanding Capabilities: A Safety Officer’s Perspective By CPT Lionel Cen – Staff Officer, AOD.

27 Safety Activities

28 What Our People Think...

30 Crossword Puzzle

Cont

ents

COL Aw Kwee SiongHead Air Force Inspectorate

As a forward-looking air force, the RSAF will continue to push the envelopes to expand our capabilities. Over the next 1 to 2 years, we will be operationalising the Heron-1 UAV to extend our air ISR reach and persistence, the SPYDER system as a step nearer to the next generation Air Defence network, and the M-346 jet trainer to replace our A-4SU Skyhawks in our 2nd phase of training transformation. As we induct these new capabilities, we must adopt a progressive build-up approach. We must attempt to reduce the number of unknowns, be ready to adjust the plans should something unexpected pop up, and actively manage the associated risks. The possible changes to the units’ structure and/or work processes may also unintentionally introduce safety “blind spots”. These need to be identified and resolved before they become bigger problems downstream.

The theme of this issue of FOCUS is on ‘Expanding Capabilities’. The articles share the challenges faced by our people in the recent operationalisation of the G550-AEW and the H-450 systems or work processes. For this, CO 125 Sqn will share on how his Sqn has created capacities to expand its capabilities, and former USO of 203 Sqn will share his perspectives on how strong work processes and safety culture are fundamentals to capability expansion.

It is critical that we expand our capabilities without compromising safety as any accident will set us back many steps. I firmly believe that by sharing these stories, we will be able to transform the RSAF’s capabilities in a controlled and effective way to sustain Mission Success, Safety Always!


FOCUS

2

FOREWORD

Foreword

SLTC Leong is currently a branch head in AOD. He is a transport pilot by vocation and last served as CO 111 SQN. SLTC Leong graduated from the Indian Defence Services Staff College in 2008.

The G550-AEW first arrived in Singapore in February 2009 to replace the E-2C Hawkeye that has served the RSAF well for over 20 years. The G550-AEW, with its advanced sensors and platform, is a quantum leap in capability for the Air Force. Within 6 months of arriving in Singapore, 111 Squadron achieved Initial Operational Capability (IOC). The following 3 years were exciting and challenging times for the Squadron as it focused on continual operational development, system development, manpower and logistics build-up as well as the gradual transition from E-2C to G550-AEW in order to achieve Full Operational Capability (FOC).

THE OPERATIONALISATION JOURNEY

One of the biggest challenges of the operationalisation journey for the G550-AEW was the need to balance 3 competing demands.

Firstly, there was the requirement for continual operational development in the work-up towards FOC. This involved constantly revisiting processes and structures already established for IOC, as well as testing out new ideas and ways of doing things.

Secondly, the development of the mission system was an ongoing process which continued through to the delivery of the final aircraft. This meant that a very intimate ops-tech relationship had to be established to allow operators to quickly offer operational feedback so that improvements to the aircraft and system can be incorporated. This also meant that the Squadron had to deal with frequent changes in operational procedures and employment considerations.

Thirdly, the Squadron had to manage the rapid build up of trained manpower, which placed heavy demands on training and training development. At the same time, the Squadron participated in both RSAF-level and multi-lateral exercises such as Ex COPE TIGER to push boundaries and for benchmarking.

With such competing demands, it was clear to the Squadron management that there was the need to ensure that all requirements were met safely, and most importantly, that nothing was going to fall through the cracks as a result of communications breakdown. There must not be undiscovered latent factors raising their ugly heads just when “all the stars are aligned”. In view of these demands, I would like to share two areas in which I thought have been the foundation that allowed the Squadron to focus on pushing ahead whilst maintaining a stable base for safe operations.


SLTC Leong Chun Siu, ex-CO 111 SQN

3

Operationalising The G550-AEW: An Ops Perspective

Ope

rati

onal

isin

g Th

e G

550-

AEW

: An

Ops

Per

spec

tive

PUSHING BOUNDARIES WHILE BALANCING DEMANDS

Being charged with developing a new capability, the Squadron worked tirelessly to put in place tactics, processes and procedures. These were constantly re-visited whenever new lessons were learnt and new ideas formed. Other than challenging mindsets and finding new ways of doing things, one concern which constantly threatened to blindside the Squadron was the pace of development itself. If the pace of change was not moderated, and more critically, changes not properly documented and promulgated, it could easily have led to confusion and breakdown in Crew Resource Management (CRM).

While it took considerable effort to develop new tactics and procedures, it took even greater effort to ensure that these were captured and disseminated to all involved personnel. In addition, as part of the manpower build up, the Squadron had a large proportion of trainees and dedicated effort was required to ensure that such updates were being translated to training materials in a timely manner. The situation was made more challenging due to continual system development. For example, at one point in time, the Squadron had three aircraft operating on different software versions each with slightly different operating considerations.

Recognising these challenges and potential pitfalls, the Squadron management had to ensure a very structured process to ensure that on-going operations and systems development were seamlessly amalgamated with daily operating procedures and tactics development. Every step had to be deliberately discussed, documented and disseminated. Feedback from the junior crew would frequently be solicited and read-back sessions conducted to ensure that the Squadron continued to move forward as a whole.

GUARDING AGAINST LATENT FACTORS

Besides the need to ensure that all personnel operated on a common baseline, there was the need to re-visit processes and procedures to ensure that latent factors that could contribute to safety infringements were identified and addressed. Think of the holes in a slice of Swiss cheese as latent factors and this effort would be that of reducing and intentionally mis-aligning the number holes in each slice of Swiss cheese. In this manner we would reduce the possibility of all the holes aligning to lead to a safety breach.


FOCUS

4

Operationalising The G

550-AEW

: An O

ps Perspective

ME6 Chia Hee ChenME5 Teo Eng Tze


One example is the review of aircraft taxy procedures. The current procedure for taxy into the aircraft weather shed involves wing-walkers on both sides of the aircraft to check for clearance between the wing and ground equipment. However, we were well aware that accidents have happened even in the presence of wing-walkers. In a review of our taxy procedures, we realised that the angle and rate of turn of the aircraft made it difficult for the wing-walkers to judge the clearance. In trials that were conducted, we further found that by the time a wing-walker could recognise a potential conflict, there was little reaction time to signal for the aircraft to stop. We could have been lulled into a false sense of security in day-to-day operations. What if there were to be a piece of ground equipment out of place and not detected, along with a junior pilot who fails to follow the taxi-line? We can now begin to see the stars aligning. The wing-walkers would not be able to do anything to stop the collision even if they had seen it coming. As part of the review, the Squadron discussed various possible solution and potential pitfalls, and carried out some trials. This resulted in the re-drawing of the taxy lines and progressive implementation to ensure ground crew and aircrew of all experience levels were competent to carry out their tasks.

The RSAF has a strong safety culture and our people are well trained. Nonetheless, we should never let ourselves be lulled into a false sense of security just because we have done our homework and have put in multiple layers of defence. In this manner, we should not be satisfied that an error was trapped, but instead analyse deeper, utilising established safety tools within the RSAF.

MOVING AHEAD

Even as the Squadron has achieved FOC, what it has realised was that the modus operandi of the past three years cannot be dropped. Latent factors could continue unnoticed for years, waiting for the perfect moment to bite the unwary. Tactics, processes and procedures will continue to be reviewed and tweaked. While we should not lose our desire to improve, we must be always cognisant that in the long run, we are only as strong as the systems - be it operational, development or training - that we put in place. In debriefing and reviews, we may note that we have performed well, but we cannot only look at outcome, but must also focus on the processes that got us there, and ensure that luck was never in the equation. Our mission success must be upheld by the safety of operations, and that in turn must be imbued in our structures that our men and women are trained to operate.

Ope

rati

onal

isin

g Th

e G

550-

AEW

: An

Ops

Per

spec

tive

Operationalising The G550-AEW:An Aircraft Generation Perspective

ME6 Chia Hee Chen is currently the Commanding Officer, 805 SQN. He holds a B.Tech in Electronics Engineering (Frist Class Honours) from the National University of Singapore. He received the IES Gold Medal for being the top graduate of the course. Prior to his current appointment, he held serveral appointments in Air Logistics Department and Sembawang Air Base.

ME5 Teo Eng Tze is currently an OC in 805 Sqn and he concurrently holds the Unit Safety Officer appointment. He graduated with Honours in Electrical and Electronics Engineering from the Nanyang Technological University. He has attended safety related courses such as the RSAF Safety Management System Course, Aircraft Accident Investigation Course by University of Southern California and has held several safety appointments at Base, Group and Squadron levels.

ME6 Chia Hee ChenME5 Teo Eng Tze

The Gulfstream 550 - Airborne Early Warning (G550-AEW) aircraft was acquired by the RSAF in 2007 to replace the E-2C AEW that had served the RSAF for more than 20 years. The RSAF received the four G550-AEWs from February 09 to October 11 and successfully achieved Full Operational Capability (FOC) status in April 12. It is timely for us to share our journey in building the G550-AEW Aircraft Generation (AcG) capabilities.

The RSAF Capabilities and Demands model is used to illustrate how we successfully built up the AcG capabilities to meet the G550-AEW operationalisation demands without compromising safety.

THE CAPABILITIES AND DEMANDS MODEL

The Capabilities and Demands Model stated in the RSAF Safety Management Manual addresses the management and allocation of resources in the context of increasing and competing demands. It is based on the precept that for any task, there is always a set of “operating demands” and “operating capabilities”. The main premise is that the likelihood of an accident is

much reduced if we do not exceed the boundaries of our capabilities. The 5-Ms are incorporated into the model with Man and Machine as the enabler of the Operational Capabilities, and the Operating Demands is driven by the Mission and Medium. Management plays a pivotal role to plan, control, supervise and ensure proper allocation of resources1.

1 RSAF-O-06-2 RSAF Safety Management Manual


FOCUS

6


550-AEW

: An A

ircraft Generation Perspective


To better scope and illustrate our use of the Capabilities and Demands model, the key components of the model are defined as:

Task

To build up the G550-AEW AcG capabilities to meet the operationalisation of G550-AEW and attain FOC status.

Operating Demands

The Mission is to induct the G550-AEW in-country and to generate the sorties to meet the Raise, Train and Sustain requirement. The Medium includes both the local operating environment and the maintenance work environment.

Operating Capabilities

The competencies and experience of the Man (Air Force Engineers (AFEs)) and the adequacies of the Machine (Tools, TMDE and Ground Support Equipment) for maintenance of the G550-AEW.

Pivot Point

The Management serves as an important role to shift the pivot point to balance the Capabilities and Demands scale. This involves management at different levels.

MANAGEMENT - BALANCING AGAINST THE RISKS OF NEW “START-UP” BY BUILDING SUCCESS FACTORS

During the initial stage of inducting the G550-AEW, the risk factors involved in building up the maintenance capabilities would have tilted the scale if the risks were not mitigated then. Our management played a pivoting role to mitigate the risk factors by building on the success factors to balance the scale. After the initial stage of induction when most risk factors were addressed, we reviewed the plans and processes to push the envelope so as to increase our capabilities to meet higher demands. This delicate balance during the initial induction and transition to FOC allowed us to build up the capabilities to meet the operating demands at a desired pace safely.

The main risk factor of management was the unknown-unknowns, which may develop into show-stoppers if not identified in advance. It is important to reduce the unknown-unknowns. The three management success factors are the Logistics Support Management Plan (LSMP), the G550-AEW Bed-down Meeting and Ops-Logs Relationship.

Fig 1. Capabilities and Demands Model

Ope

rati

onal

isin

g Th

e G

550-

AEW

: An

Air

craf

t Gen

erat

ion

Pers

pect

ive


FOCUS

8

The LSMP is institutionalised to systematically plan and document the logistics efforts needed from the relevant agencies in ALD, Logistics Units, DSTA and defence industries. This ensures smooth phase-in and implementation of new major weapon system. The LSMP for G550-AEW documented the key consideration and plan of all logistics elements required to build up in-country capabilities. The systemic approach of the LSMP comprehensively covered the logistics requirements of G550-AEW.

The G550-AEW Bed-down Meeting was the main forum to plan and track the progress of the logistics setup prior to the delivery of the G550-AEW. The agenda included Logistics and Technical Orders Promulgation, AFEs’ training, Spares and Support Equipment delivery, Enterprise System (ES) data creation, and Infrastructure setup. The meeting played a significant role to closely prioritise and

coordinate all the bed-down activities. The bed-down started six months before the 1st aircraft’s arrival and it involved all stakeholders from ALD, DSTA and 111 SQN.

The strong Ops-Logs Relationship contributed significantly in balancing the pace to phase-in the G550-AEW operation and to scale down the E-2C operation. The 111 SQN operationalisation plan took into consideration the readiness of the G550-AEW logistics capabilities build-up and the resources to sustain the E-2C operation. As we did our utmost to maintain the readiness of both the G550-AEW and the E-2C during the transition period, 111 SQN gave due consideration to logistics constraints and adjusted their plans whenever required without affecting ops readiness.

MISSION – INDUCTION OF G550-AEW

The G550-AEW is one of the most sophisticated AEW platforms in the world today. It is equipped with the state-of-the-art avionics suite and sophisticated mission suite that includes an Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar.

Fig 2. Capabilities & Demands Model for Operationalisation of the G550-AEW


550-AEW

: An A



The risk factor of the mission lies in maintaining a new aircraft type with a complex suite of mission systems. There were limited engineering and logistics experience on the G550-AEW. Futhermore, the aircraft was heavily modified to incorporate a suite of mission systems resulting in unique engineering issues not experienced by the civilian G550 business jet.

The strong airworthiness governance of the RSAF largely minimised the risk of inducting the new G550-AEW. The engineering data on the aircraft modifications were meticulously reviewed by the engineering community through forum such as the Aircraft Systems Modification Committee (ASMC), Air Platform Working Group (APWG) and Software Modifications Committee (SMC). Although it was a laborious process to seek the various fora’s approvals to certify the G550-AEW airworthiness, they were important milestones to ensure that the design meets the Margin of Safety and that all the associated ground and flight tests were carried out comprehensively.

MEDIUM – MAINTENANCE WORK ENVIRONMENT & LOCAL OPERATING ENVIRONMENT Maintenance Work Environment

Maintenance work on the G550-AEW posed new risk factor in our AFE’s work environment, in the form workplace hazards that our AFEs may not be previously exposed to. The success factor was to adopt a risk control programme using the HIRA methodology under the OHSAS 18001 framework to mitigate the risk. For example, the replacement of fin cap located at the top of the aircraft horizontal stabiliser involves AFEs working at a height of 10m. The risk was mitigated by 1) providing a stable elevated work platform, and 2) incorporating the use of slings to facilitate the removal and installation of the fin cap radome.

Another work environment improvement was on the engine ground run site. While the initial concept was to carry out the engine ground run at the dispersal site, it was subsequently rationalised that for personnel safety and Foreign Object Damage(FOD) control, it was safer to conduct high power engine ground run at a dedicated ground run pad with a jet blast deflector. The F-16 ground run pad was upgraded to cater to the G550-AEW and F-15SG to optimise the renovation cost. With this, the engine ground run could now be carried out without disrupting other activities and vehicular traffic around the dispersal site.

Local Operating Environment

The local environment of tropical thunderstorm and high humidity were risk factors that may contribute to additional aircraft defects or lower aircraft reliability. In the first few months of local operations, the high rainfall caused pitting on some of the radomes. Our AFEs promptly initiated engineering measures by adding anti-erosion tapes on the forward portion of the radomes, which effectively reduced the pitting problem and decreased the aircraft’s downtime.

Ope

rati

onal

isin

g Th

e G

550-

AEW

: An

Air

craf

t Gen

erat

ion

Pers

pect

ive


FOCUS

10

MAN – PROFESSIONAL AFEs, THE KEY SUCCESS FACTOR

There were 3 success factors that addressed the low aircraft type experience of our AFEs on the G550-AEW aircraft. Firstly, our pioneer group of AFEs were selected from different aircraft communities with broad based experiences, instead of from the E-2C community alone. The AFEs from different aircraft communties brought in specific competencies that helped to steepen the learning curve in maintaining the G550-AEW. Not having all the pioneer AFEs from the E-2C community also provided rich perspectives and robust views which prevented the “Group Think” pitfall. Secondly, our pioneer AFEs were sent for overseas training at the OEM’s facilities and were involved in the system development and tests. The pioneer AFEs subsequently developed a comprehensive training package, which enabled the training of new AFEs locally. They also developed the G550 Cockpit Avionics Mockup to provide a more realistic classroom training, and reduced the training requirement on the aircraft.

The third success factor was to have our AFE apply their newly acquired knowledge through comprehensive review of the the technical publication and in the process strengthen their knowledge on the G550-AEW. Our pioneer AFEs thoroughly reviewed the publications and highlighted a significant number of discrepancies to the OEM. They also developed the G550-AEW Flightline Procedures and Daily Servicing Checklists to improve the mission success rate and aircraft safety. At the onset, there were no Daily

Servicing Checklists for the G550-AEW. Our AFEs built upon the pre-flight procedures for the civilian variant of the G550 and incorporated the inspection requirements for the mission systems. They reviewed the checklist after one year of data collection and managed to trim down the checklist which reduced the duration of daily servicing. These ALD approved in-house developed checklists were testimony to the competencies of our AFEs.

MACHINE – IMPROVEMENT THROUGH INNOVATION

The comprehensive review of requirement during the project phase ensured the essential support equipment were procured which contributed to the smooth induction of the G550-AEW. This has precluded the risk factor of incurring any limitation to our operations due to inadequate support equipment.


550-AEW

: An A



At the unit level, we recognise there are opportunities to improve our support equipment based on our operation context which will enhance safety and increase productivity. We encouraged our innovative AFEs to explore better equipment using their experience and leverage on maintenance technology. Some of the implemented ideas were:.

Using F16 Weighing Kit

Periodic weighing of the G550-AEW is required to check that the aircraft’s weight and balance is within the technical limits. Traditionally, the task was performed using a weighing scale by STA Engineering, who was contracted to perform this task. It requires the servicing of the landing gears struct to level the aircraft and towing the aircraft up and down the scale ramps multiple times. We successfully explored using the F-16 weighing kit which uses a load cell instead. The benefits are reduced risk, shortened weighing process and build up of in-house capability.

Wireless Communication Set

Bluetooth communication headsets were procured to facilitate communication between the ground crew and the pilot during flight-line and maintenance operations. The wireless communication eliminated

the tripping hazards associated with cable cords and improved the ground crew’s mobility during checks around the aircraft.

Ground Air-Con Cart

The working environment in the aircraft cabin can be hot and humid which may lead to distraction and fatigue. An in-house designed electrical ground cooling unit was assembled using commercial compressor to pipe cool air into the aircraft’s interior. The feedback from our AFEs were positive.

CONCLUSION

We are proud of our achievements in operationalising the AcG capabilities of the G550-AEW over the past three years. The management played a pivoting role to balance the Operating Demands versus the Operating Capabilities so that the G550-AEW’s operationalisation was achieved safely. The strong RSAF safety culture, our professional AFEs, our innovativeness together with the robust engineering and logistics processes are the success factors that balanced against the risk factors associated with the induction of the G550-AEW.

Ope

rati

onal

isin

g Th

e G

550-

AEW

: An

Air

craf

t Gen

erat

ion

Pers

pect

ive

The H-450 Journey

LTC Chiun Koon Wee is currently the Commanding Officer of 116 SQN. He previously held the appointment of Head of System Development Branch in UAV Command (2009-2011) and Head of SAF UAV Office in APD (2008-2009). LTC Chiun graduated from the Singapore Command and Staff Course in 2007.

LTC Chiun Koon Wee, CO 116 SQN


FOCUS

12

INTRODUCTION

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) are successfully transforming the way modern air forces conduct air operations around the world. Besides performing air imagery, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) missions, UAVs have also fired weapons against hostile ground targets for the first time since the Vietnam War1. For example, the USAF operators have done so by piloting the Predator UAVs remotely from the comfort of their air-conditioned rooms located in Battle Creek National Guard Airbase in the U.S. while conducting operations over Afghanistan and Iraq2. UAVs have become the choice multi-role capable platform for many western air forces.

As part of the RSAF’s transformation journey to develop the 3rd Generation Air Force, the RSAF has also acquired two new UAVs, the Hermes 450 (H-450) and the Heron 1, to replace the long-serving Searcher. These UAVs will enhance the ISR capabilities of the SAF and provide the SAF with the information superiority edge to access the “3rd dimension” battlefield situation picture in an accurate and timely manner. This article documents our journey in the safe operationalisation of the H-450 capability.

ACQUISITION OF H-450

The H-450 was inaugurated into the UAV Command in 2007, as part of the UAV capability build up plan of the RSAF. Operated by the newly formed 116 Squadron, the H-450 is a new generation UAV which is piloted by two UAV pilots. It is equipped with advanced avionics that enables it to conduct ISR operations for both day and night. With an improved engine and capable of carrying more fuel, the H-450 is twice as capable as the Searcher, with an increased loiter time and higher operating altitude. Together with the Heron 1 being ushered into the RSAF inventory, these UAVs will meet the expanded ISR demands of the SAF.

The RSAF has had many years of experience in operationalising new air platforms. This is the third UAV that the RSAF has operationalised. The first UAV was the Scout RPV3 by 128 Squadron under the Tactical Air Support Command (TASC) in 1988 and the second UAV was the Searcher by 119 Squadron a decade later in 1998. To achieve effective and safe operations for the H-450, we drew from our experience of operationalising the Scout, Searcher and other air systems. We also tapped on the knowledge and experience of other air forces who have operationalised similar types of UAVs.

1 “Afghan Ops Bolster UAV Market” dated 19 Nov 02. Website: http://www.spacedaily.com/news/uav-02p.html2 “Predator UAV Proves Its Worth,” American Forces Information Service. Website: http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/afweapons/a/preditor.htm3 RPV refers to Remoted Piloted Vehicle

The H-450 Journey


STARTING OPERATIONALISATION EFFORTS DURING THE DEVELOPMENT PHASE

We began the operationalisation efforts as early as the development phase, as UAVs offer more flexibility for customisation due to the separation of the cockpit from the aircraft. Briefly, the UAV system comprises four key components, the air vehicle, the payload, the datalink and the Ground Control Station (GCS). The GCS comprises computer-based consoles that are integrated with flight control sticks similar to that of the Hands-On-Throttle-And-Stick (HOTAS) found on new generation manned aircraft. We were able to customise the flight controls for our UAV pilots to efficiently pilot the H-450 and control the payload. In addition, we were able to customise the form and displays of the GCS to ensure the compatibility of the H-450 with the rest of the SAF systems. The following are two examples:

Laser Codes Definition for H-450

To achieve better interoperability with our manned platforms, such as the fighters and attack helicopters, we adopted the same laser designator codes for the H-450. This also allows us to be compatible with other foreign forces if required.

Back-End Connectivity

The infrastructure for Command and Control for the SAF requires all its operational systems to adopt a common system protocol for their interfaces that would take years to develop. As we worked hand-in-hand with the programme managers from DSTA, we were able to identify the users that we were required to interface with and allow the necessary connectivity to be developed in parallel with the H-450 programme.

INDUCTING THE H-450

A strong core group of experienced ops and logs crew is critical in ensuring success in the operationalisation. As we moved from development to production phase, we began to form the core group with the UAV pilots and Air Force Engineers (AFEs) that would become the pioneer crew of the squadron. The core group was made up of experienced UAV pilots and AFEs selected from the existing Searcher UAV Squadrons as well as operators and AFEs of other specialisations and vocations from other Commands. An added benefit was also to have core group members ‘pulled’ from the other vocations/platforms to facilitate the cross-pollination of expertise.

The

H-4

50 Jo

urne

y


FOCUS

14

Participation in Evaluation Flights

The core group attended the various operator and system engineering courses, and subsequently, participated in the subsequent test flights to evaluate the performance of the H-450. The operator and system engineering courses raised the knowledge of the core group in the H-450 system, while the participation reinforced their understanding and built their confidence in the H-450 as these test flights were designed to test the limits of the UAV operating envelope. With better appreciation of the H-450, firstly, the core group proceeded to develop the provisional Operating Procedures, training manuals and operator training requirements, which were approved before the system was delivered. These documents and doctrines were necessary before the squadron commenced its operation, and the early involvement of the core group had facilitated this effort. Secondly, the core group was able to work with the Air Traffic Control (ATC) to develop the manned-unmanned procedures for operations in Tengah Airbase (TAB), where we are based. As TAB was predominantly a manned platform base, we had to conceptualise and develop a comprehensive plan to mitigate the risks involved in concurrent operations for the H-450 and manned platforms. This included the procedures to facilitate ground movement, launch and recoveries and a response matrix to address when both aircraft types are experiencing emergencies. Finally, we conducted a series of table-top exercises to refine our plan and ensure that we have addressed all aspects of operating manned and unmanned out of a common airbase comprehensively. With a good understanding of the H-450 system and its performance as well as good collaboration with other supporting agencies, we were able to establish the operating procedures for manned-unmanned operations in TAB.

Core Group Training

The core group training was carried out in two phases. In the first phase, our core group attended basic system training where the operators were trained on how to operate the H-450. In the second phase, the

core group advanced to mission oriented training, where our operators and logistics crew worked effectively as a team to conduct H-450 missions. The training in this phase was also designed to allow our operators to fully exploit the capability of the H-450. This was achieved with the OEM providing qualified UAV instructors and technical specialists who were experienced operational crew in other air forces (some are still in the Reserves).

Learning New Skills

One challenge arising from having experienced personnel in the core group, however, was the need to learn a new skill set in operating the H-450. As mentioned earlier, the H-450 operates like a dual cockpit transport aircraft or helicopter, with one senior and one junior UAV pilot operating from identical consoles and complementing one another during operation. Their roles and workload can be shared or divided flexibly, so that the pair can effectively carry out the given mission. This is in contrast with the Searcher where the three crew roles of Mission Commander, Internal Pilot and Payload Operator are mutually exclusive. This is due to the design of the Searcher GCS, which has dedicated pilot and payload consoles for the Internal Pilot and the Payload Operator respectively. In addition, the Searcher Mission Commander is responsible for the overall success of the mission. However, he can only direct the Payload Operator and Internal Pilot on what he wants them to do, without having access to the UAV or payload controls. By combining the 3 roles into 2, the Mission Commander now feels more “liberated” as he has direct control of UAV and its mission. On the other hand, the junior Searcher pilots functioning as Co-Pilot in the H-450 is now responsible to pilot the UAV and operate the payload at the same time. This was difficult at first as the junior UAV pilots were not trained to multi-task between the two roles. It took some effort to train and build up the competency of our junior UAV pilots to perform these two roles concurrently, and maximise the full potential offered by the H-450 in a 2-man crew concept.

The H-450 Journey


INNOVATIONS TO OPERATE NEW PLATFORMS Besides having experienced UAV pilots and AFEs, the posting of new personnel from the other Commands with other trades and specialisations into the new squadron further enhanced our operationalisation efforts, with the pollination of new ideas and good practices from operating other air platforms which helped to strengthen H-450 operations. Some of the innovative ideas we have developed include:

Improved Communication

One change brought about to H-450 operation is the improved communication between the UAV pilots and the ground crew. Today, the ground check for H-450 is carried out collaboratively by both the External Pilot (EP) and the Crew Chief – a concept adopted from F-16 operations. Adopting the new procedure, the Crew Chief will call out the responses of the H-450 flight control surfaces to the EP via intercom. This alleviates the need to tow the aircraft near to the EP point and enhances the overall efficiency of H-450 ground operations. Furthermore, instead of using a walkie-talkie, the ground crew uses the same intercom system used by the F-16 ground crew to communicate with one another during ground checks. This allows the H-450 ground crew to communicate with one another despite the loud noise from the H-450’s engine as well as from other aircraft operating in the vicinity.

“Red Ball” Team

The H-450 had encountered a spate of technical anomalies in the early stages of operationalisation, which resulted in a number of training sorties

being cancelled. Post-technical analysis concluded that some of these defects could be easily rectified. Hence, Air Logistics Squadron introduced the “Red Ball” Team concept. The “Red Ball” team is another concept adopted from F-16 operations, where a technical team is assigned to be on hot standby to respond to minor maintenance anomalies. This practice has proved effective for minor rectifications, allowing the aircraft to continue its mission and averting any unnecessary deviations. Since the “Red Ball” Team concept was introduced, we were able to respond to the technical issues quickly and minimise the unnecessary cancellation of training sorties. Thus, we were able to achieve a marked improvement in H-450’s serviceability within a short period of time.

Tow Vehicle for UAV

Instead of using wing walkers to walk the UAV from point to point, as is done for the Searcher, the H-450 comes with a UAV Support Vehicle (USV) to tow the aircraft. Each USV is also equipped with the Flight Line Tester (FLT) to perform the start up procedures and functional checks prior to launch. The combination of the USV and FLT has streamlined H-450 ground operations, reducing the manpower needed. Together, they have enhanced H-450 ground operations. This concept was later introduced to Searcher operations under the UAV Task Group deployed to support the multi-national reconstruction efforts in Afghanistan in 2010. We improvised a tow device to tow the Searcher to the end of the runway for launch. This procedure not only reduced the taxying time by eliminating the need to walk the UAV, but also reduced the risk of our troops’ exposure to direct fire since they now travelled in a vehicle and were able to complete the taxying process more expeditiously.

The

H-4

50 Jo

urne

y


FOCUS

16

OPERATIONALISATION IS AN ONGOING JOURNEY

Although we have operated the H-450 for a while now, operationalisation is an ongoing journey. In order for us to keep pace with UAV developments around the world, we must continue to tap on the experience of other air forces. To this end, we have conducted professional exchanges with various advanced air forces on UAV developments, such as the United States Air Force, Royal Australian Air Force, German Air Force, French Air Force, and Indian Air Force, who are operating new generation UAVs such as the Global Hawk, Predator, Heron 1 and H-450. Through these exchanges, we gained insights on how they employ their UAVs. We have exchanged views on issues from as basic as surveillance techniques to issues as complex as conducting air campaigns that involve both UAVs and manned platforms. For example, we drew insights from the US and German Air Forces on how they managed airspace for UAV operations in Continental USA as well as in Europe. We learnt lessons from the Royal Australian Air Force and the French Air Force on their Heron 1 UAV and Harfang UAV Deployments to Afghanistan. These professional exchanges have aided us in our progress towards manned-unmanned integrated operations in TAB as well as our successful UAV deployment to Afghanistan.

Besides learning from other air forces, it is also important that we share our H-450 operationalisation journey with the Heron 1 core group which has recently begun their operationalisation journey. Challenges faced and lessons gleaned from our H-450 journey has been shared. For example, the Heron 1 core group adopted the same approach to train the

core group early. Training syllabus and operating procedures have been developed in tandem to achieve commonality between our two platforms given that both platforms share similar operating concepts. This cross sharing will allow the UAV Command to achieve an even greater effectiveness in our Heron 1’s operationalisation efforts.

CONCLUSION

The operationalisation of H-450 has been a challenging journey that is filled with unknowns and new developments. The success of our journey is a result of having a team of dedicated and committed personnel who have worked hard and well together to address these challenges through careful planning and the willingness to explore new ideas and concepts. We have developed an efficient work force as well as an effective operational work flow for the H-450. Going forward, these lessons will be useful for the squadron in our continuous effort to operationalise the H-450 to exploit its full potential, and it will also be useful to 119 Squadron towards their operationalisation of the Heron 1 in the coming months. In the longer term, the cumulative experiences will contribute to the safe, effective and efficient operationalisation of our future UAVs.

The H-450 Journey

INTRODUCTION

The idea of creating capacity is by no means new or groundbreaking. On the contrary, the concept of doing more with less in order to be more efficient in achieving our goals is instinctive within every individual. People in management or leadership positions both in the private and public sectors naturally look to improve the way they do things at the individual and organisational levels towards achieving their mission.

This article examines the journey 125 Squadron has taken to address why it was important to make creating capacity a key priority and to share the various measures implemented over the years to alleviate the problems at hand. The eventual success of these measures was made possible with the support of the higher authorities as well as through the hard work of the Commanding Officers and management teams of the Super Puma (SP) squadrons (125 and 126 Squadrons) through the years. It is therefore important to acknowledge that it was not an individual effort, but an effort that was owned collectively.

BACKGROUND

Due to the versatility of the SP, there has been an increasing range of tasks with greater complexities assigned to the SP squadrons over the years. The following paragraphs detail certain critical factors which took place in the recent history of the SP squadrons which necessitated this effort of creating capacity.

Peacetime Standby Requirements

The 24/7 Peacetime Standby (PS) requirements for the SP squadrons have gradually increased over the years and Search and Rescue (SAR) is a major player in this regard. Our national

commitment, as stipulated in the SAR agreements1, is to provide SAR service within our Flight Information Region (FIR). The RSAF had been providing SAR coverage with 2 sets (Rescue 10 and 11) of crew on 24/7 standby, ready to respond within 15 and 30 mins of activation respectively.

On top of the SAR standby, there are other daily and periodic standby requirements which further stretch limited manpower resources.

1 According to the AIP GEN 3.6-1, SAR agreements have been concluded between Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore and the SAR authorities or agencies of Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam. These agreements provide for mutual assistance in the conduct of SAR operations within each others’ SAR Regions (SRR) and approval for entry of SAR aircraft, vessels and personnel of one State into the SRR of another State, with prior permission, for the purpose of conducting SAR operations or rendering SAR assistance and for direct communications between the SAR authorities or agencies on all common SAR matters

LTC Sherman Ong is currently the Commanding Officer of 125 SQN. LTC Ong is a recipient of the SAF Merit Scholarship and holds a Bachelor of Science (Summa Cum Laude) in Mechanical Engineering and a Master of Science in Engineering from the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor, USA. LTC Ong graduated from the French War College in 2011.

LTC Sherman Ong Sher MengCO 125 SQN



Expa

ndin

g Ca

pabi

litie

s Thr

ough

Cre

atin

g Ca

paci

ty


FOCUS

18


Overseas Commitments

In 2005, with the drawdown of the ageing UH-1H Huey fleet, 125 Squadron was given the task to take over the Huey’s role of supporting the Army’s training overseas. Additionally, the SP squadrons were also maintaining a permanent detachment in Oakey Training Centre (OTC), Australia. In order to ensure that sufficient manpower was available to support local commitments, it was decided that the overseas detachments would be manned by a small core of permanent staff and supported by rotational crew from the local SP squadrons.

Over and above these overseas deployments, our squadrons are frequently on overseas exercises such as Ex Wallaby,

Ex Cope Tiger and Thailand Detachments. As multi-role medium lift helicopters, the SPs have also been involved in Humanitarian Aid and Disaster Relief (HADR) operations such as Operation Flying Eagle (OFE) and Peace Support Operations (PSO) such as Operation Blue Sapphire (OBS).

Introduction of New Platforms

In addition, between 2006 and 2009, there was a steady exodus of pilots (active and staff) and Aircrew Specialists (ACS) to staff the AH-64 Apache Attack Helicopters (AH) and the S-70B Sikorsky Naval Helicopter (NH) programmes, leading to a very drastic dip in manning over a short span of three years.

These factors combined to contribute to an increased loading in terms of tasks and missions, and insufficient manpower to cope. The rotational policy for overseas detachments also resulted in personnel being deployed overseas at a higher frequency.

TRIGGER POINT

In 2008, a manpower resource study of 125 Squadron conducted by the Applied Behavioural Science Department (ABSD) concluded that there existed an unhealthy working environment with prolonged time spent away from family, thus affecting the morale of squadron personnel.

This trigger point did not happen overnight. It was a result of all of the above stress factors culminating in a single point of fracture. In retrospect, it is intuitive that the problem was a result of a lack of capacity that required us to take immediate action to address the issue. In this context, capacity can be seen to have a direct relationship with the amount of resources we have (manpower, man hours, aircraft, etc), and an indirect relationship with the assigned missions (operations, tasks in support of training within the SAF, overseas deployments and detachments, HADR/PSO missions, etc).


MEASURES IMPLEMENTED

Faced with this situation, the SP squadrons worked together to find solutions to alleviate the problems at hand. In a nutshell, there were things within the unit’s control to change, and things that were not which required the support of the higher authorities. It was also recognised that the actions taken at the Group, Command and Service levels to address resource inadequacies and operational redundancies would have a much higher leverage than structural reforms at the unit level, albeit with a greater time lag. As such, it was necessary to start at the unit level while concurrently addressing the issues at the organisational level. For the latter, this involved surfacing the issues, convincing the approving authorities of the need to implement change, providing the options which would help alleviate the situation and leaving the decisions to the collective wisdom of the organisation.

Addressing Resource Inadequacies and Operational Redundancies

Manpower and Establishments

The problem of sub-optimal manning had to be addressed at the group and command levels. In our case, the SP management decided to surface the poor manning issue and the adverse impact it was having on squadron personnel to the higher authorities. Thanks to the support lent by our commanders who understood the severity of the issue, a deliberate effort was made to rectify the situation, resulting in a steady stream of personnel posted into the SP community. Additionally, we effected a transfer of two permanent establishments to overseas, and reduced the frequency of overseas rotations.

Stand-Down of Rescue 11 Requirements for SAR

During a Search and Locate/Search and Rescue (SAL/SAR) forum in 2009, discussion with CAAS, we realised that the SP’s SAR commitment was above what was required. Thus, 125 SQN, with the backing of Helicopter Group and Participation Command, started the process to stand-down R11, which was eventually approved by HQ RSAF. The standby requirement for SAR was thus effectively halved (to just R10). This freed up the squadron’s resources significantly to be diverted towards training and supporting the other services’ tasks.

Identifying Untapped Resources

At the squadron level, much too could be done to identify and better leverage on previously untapped resources. Our efforts to create capacity led us to explore better employment of our NSmen during their ICTs as well as making the most out of our unique circumstance of maintaining the overseas detachments for operational training.

Employment of NS Resources

This year we celebrate 45 years of National Service. While it is important to recognise our NSmen’s contributions, it is also timely to be cognisant of the fact that there is still room to employ our NS resources much more effectively, especially in augmenting operational manning. For example, while it has always been a practice to employ our NSF ACS as SAR winchmen, it was only following the active manning shortfalls that the SP squadrons made a conscious decision to better utilise our NSmen ACS for SAR duties. Today, our NSmen ACS are capable of performing daytime SAR stand-in duties after completing their refresher courses during their High-Key ICTs. HeliG is currently also exploring the possibility of qualifying these NSmen for night roles and standbys.

For the past 3 years (2009-2011), the SP community has also recalled 2 NSmen ACS each year to support OBS(Maritime). One of the most recent NSmen success stories (and one that is widely publicised) is that of 2SG Given Tng, who fired off the RSAF’s first combat shot in 1 Nov 2011 during the sinking of a suspected pirate skiff.

These are examples of how we have employed our NSmen to produce a win-win scenario. By employing them gainfully, we not only increase our effective manpower for operations, but at the same time we give them a sense of purpose and satisfaction by involving them in national and international commitments such as SAR and counter-piracy operations.

Expa

ndin

g Ca

pabi

litie

s Thr

ough

Cre

atin

g Ca

paci

ty


FOCUS

20

Reviewed Training Plans for Super Pumas

In addition to the local training areas within Singapore, the SP community has had the opportunity to train in very different but excellent overseas theatres. In order to maximise the full potential of each training area, we embarked on a fundamental relook at our training plans by first examining the value proposition of each training theatre. While one theatre offers a vast terrain and is ideal for conducting general handling, navigation, formation and night flying for OCUs, the other possesses a very challenging terrain and weather, which can be used effectively to train operational pilots and ACS in honing and adding finesse to their skills. For local training, there is greater interaction with other agencies within and outside of the SAF to allow the development of our aircrew’s task level competencies.

Another key consideration to the design of this plan was to create capacity for the local squadrons. To this end, it was important to keep personnel with greater expertise locally to support SAR, peacetime standby, and local training while deploying the junior aircrew to develop their core flying skills abroad. This is also congruent with the fact that the junior aircrew are more deployable abroad as they would have less family constraints and commitments. Cognisant of these considerations, we thus developed a comprehensive training plan that will see junior aircrew spending a greater proportion of their time building fundamental skill sets in OTC initially. As they progress along their Training Road Maps, they will then be exposed at intervals to the more challenging operating environment overseas and integrated cross-service training experiences in Singapore.

Identifying Low-lying Fruits

In addition to harnessing new resources, the squadron also looked into other means within our purview that could be used to ameliorate some of the difficulties faced by both squadron management and personnel caused by the frequent overseas aircrew rotations.

Overseas Detachment/Exercise Forecast

Recognising the detrimental effect that uncertainty in overseas posting plans has on morale, the squadron put in place a forecast chart that demands the forward planning of overseas personnel movement for up to a year. It charts out every pilot and ACS by name and spells out the exact dates and duration of the detachments, rotations and exercises that they would be involved in. As this is done up to a year in advance, personnel with forecasted commitments the following year can make the necessary changes or swaps to fit their own personal schedules. This offers a greater sense of stability not only to the individual and their families, but also to the management as well.

Review of Squadron Secondary Appointments

The frequent aircrew rotations meant that personnel leaving for overseas deployments often had to hand over their secondary appointments to people who might not be adequately trained. This led to cases where individuals had to cover several appointments simultaneously, often with no prior training, resulting in inefficient work processes in the squadron. To ensure a seamless transition amidst the rotations, 125 SQN has implemented a reorganisation of the secondary appointments into various functional cells, with the functional cell leads tasked to oversee the appointments under their purview. This synergistic grouping of secondary appointments ensures the mutual coverage of appointments under each cell in the absence of any individual. This reorganisation is currently in its infancy and a review would be done to assess its effectiveness.



CURRENT SITUATION

The measures implemented over the past few years have visibly improved the situation of the SP squadrons. In recent years, the results of various surveys conducted and regular feedback from the ground have been generally healthy. In terms of manpower, currently, all the SP squadrons are healthily manned with a healthy supervisory ratio. An internal study conducted by 125 SQN revealed that aircrew averaged 3 - 4 months overseas each year and 3 - 4 SAR duties each month. This improvement over the manpower resource study in 2008 was achieved in spite of a 3 month long counter-piracy deployment in the Gulf of Aden that involved several squadron personnel! The forecast of overseas deployments and the reviewed training plans have also provided aircrew with the added sense of control and direction over their time away from home. These tangible and intangible improvements to the morale of squadron aircrew contribute to a greater capacity to focus on other areas, such as training and operational requirements.

LEVELS OF PERSPECTIVE FRAMEWORK

I was introduced to the Levels of Perspective framework recently, which I found most useful in allowing me to perceive issues at multiple levels (because there are various levels of reality, depending on how one perceives it) and take actions at these levels. Looking back at the journey of the SP squadrons over the past few years, the Levels of Perspective (LOP) framework (see Figure 1), although not intentionally employed then, can help us to analyse the problem and understand the efficacy of actions taken at various levels.

This framework may be familiar to some, as it is endorsed by the SAF and taught at various ROA courses. As such, I will not embark on an elaborate explanation of the framework, but draw out a few learning points using the context of creating capacity. For example, if we had chosen to treat the problem symptomatically at the “events” or “patterns” level, we would remain in a reactive or adaptive mode, or in our common lingo, a “fire-fighting” mode. A case in point was that when there were some morale problems at the individual level, we could have reacted by treating it symptomatically and giving the affected individuals more time off to spend with their families. These are directly observable occurrences and we react to them by taking reactive actions. If it is an emergency or crisis, the reactive actions do grant us the action with the highest leverage. As more individuals were seen to have this behaviour and a pattern was evolving, we could adapt to give all personnel time off or perhaps to arrange for an ad hoc session to talk about the situation.

Figure 1: Levels of Perspective (LOP) Framework

Expa

ndin

g Ca

pabi

litie

s Thr

ough

Cre

atin

g Ca

paci

ty

However, it would be limiting if we just reacting to everything and being adaptive by moving up the level of patterns over time. Going back to the LOP framework in Figure 1, if we notice the arrow on the left, we can see that the leverage increases as we go higher. That is to say, addressing issues at the “systemic structures” level tend to be more effective in bringing positive and enduring change. The SP squadron’s experience has proven that to be the case, as many of the plans that were highlighted earlier were changes to “systemic structures” that were implemented “creative”-ly. Presently, we may have yet to address issues at the “mental models” and the “vision” levels, as they are probably the most difficult to shape. But such difficulties should not deter us for a breakthrough at these levels will enable us to go into the “reflective” and “generative” modes which can be game-changers for both the individuals and the organisation.

However, going back to the LOP framework in Figure 1, if we notice the arrow on the left, we can see that the leverage increases as we go higher. That is to say, addressing issues at the “structures” level tend to be more effective in bringing positive and enduring change. The SP squadron’s experience has proven that to be the case, as

many of the plans that were highlighted earlier were changes to “systemic structures” that were implemented “creative”-ly. Presently, we may have yet to address issues at the “mental models” and the “vision” levels, as they are probably the most difficult to shape. But such difficulties should not deter us as a breakthrough at those levels will enable us to go into the “reflective” and “generative” modes which can be game-changers for the individuals and the organisation.

CONCLUSION

There are many lessons to be learnt from the journey that the SP community took, and truth be told, we are not close to our desired end-state. There is much room for improvement, but what is important is that the squadron is heading in the right direction. Creating capacity is an issue close to everyone’s heart, regardless of rank or appointment, because it deals with how we can do things better without over-stretching our own resources. To this end, we need to recognise the root causes of the problem and to tackle them and not the symptoms. If we are able to see things beyond our normal “fire-fighting” mode, we should then be able to put in place systemic structures as a long-term solution. Only then will we have the capacity to address the things that are truly important and fight the right battles.


FOCUS

22


INTRODUCTION

As the RSAF embarks on the second spiral of transformation, we must continue to build upon our solid foundations and sound fundamentals, core of which is safety. Over the years, the RSAF has developed a comprehensive safety framework. The successful employment of this framework has resulted in a declining trend of accidents, even as we were transforming fundamentally. Although the RSAF’s safety framework has been widely adopted, we need to customise it to suit the unit’s operational requirements. As new platforms are inducted, the RSAF’s airspace demands will naturally evolve. 203 SQN is therefore continually expanding its capability to flexibly manage

the national airspace to meet the RSAF’s operational and training needs. At the same time, as we continually upgrade our C2 systems, the unit will also need to manage its resources to handle new technologies, while operating and maintaining existing systems. To achieve “Mission Success, Safety Always”, 203 SQN management focuses its efforts in the four areas of processes, responsibility and accountability, culture and environment.

PROCESSES

The unit’s operations are governed by our standard operating procedures (SOP) and processes. These SOPs and processes are built upon past experiences and other units’ best practices. It is imperative that our people must align to the same standards to achieve a common understanding with one another during operations. Therefore, SOPs are crafted to provide maximum clarity to the servicemen and avoid misinterpretation or confusion.

The crafting of SOPs and processes is only the first step. To ensure that the servicemen fully understand and apply the SOPs and processes, it is important for the management to explain to the servicemen the rationale behind the processes and the associated implications. Only then will they be able to internalise the requirements, and exercise correct judgement by applying their knowledge in dealing without of the norm situations. It will also ensure that the personnel do not blindly follow processes without realising the significance of missing steps. A good illustration would be that of the ashram cat, a short story written by the priest Anthony de Mello. The story talks about how a guru was distracted by the ashram cat during evening prayers, and ordered that the cat be tied up so as not to disturb worshippers. However, the worshippers continued to tie the ashram cat after the guru died, to the extent of replacing the cat with a new one when it died too. Centuries later, scholars wrote about the liturgical significance of tying the ashram cat, without even knowing why it was tied in the first place.

CPT Lionel Cen is currently a Staff Officer in Air Operations Department. He is trained as an Air Warfare Office (C3) and last served as the Unit Safety Officer in 203 SQN.

CPT Lionel Cen – Staff Officer, AOD.

Expanding Capabilities -A Safety Officer’s Perspective


Expa

ndin

g Ca

pabi

litie

s - A

Saf

ety

Offi

cer’s

Per

spec

tive

With the fast and constantly changing ops tempo and environment, new systems and capabilities are being introduced every couple of years. With their introduction, existing SOPs and processes may become obsolete. The SQN reviews the SOPs and processes regularly to ensure that they remain current and relevant. In doing so, the SQN takes into account all considerations prior to implementation. Extensive consultation and feedback is sought from within the unit and external agencies to ensure that the SOPs and processes are comprehensive to cover all the potential issues and pitfalls that may arise during the implementation and execution phases.

While crafting new SOPs and processes, the SQN keeps in mind that while the man-in-the-loop may change, knowledge must be retained within the system. In other words, the processes must be self-governing in nature so that when a new person takes over, there will be a seamless transition that is less reliant on the handover/takeover of the persons involved. The unit also documents and archives the rationales and background knowledge for future reference.

RESPONSIBILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY

Responsibility and accountability are two different levels of defining our daily tasks. Responsibility is “the obligation to carry out an assigned task to a successful conclusion” means “being answerable to someone or for some action”; in this case, our own actions. When servicemen understand the rationale behind the work that they do, it instils a sense of responsibility. By taking ownership for the tasks, they feel a sense of pride knowing that they can make a difference to the unit and the organisation. They would also actively seek improvement to streamline the processes and increase productivity at the workplace.

In particular, one of the responsibilities of a unit is to ensure that clear processes are promulgated, and will be held accountable if it was not. When clear processes are in place, any personnel who wilfully neglects or contravenes them will be held accountable for his/her actions. Ultimately, the unit is still responsible to ensure that such occurrences are minimised through education and positive reinforcement. In the old days, we may adopt the ‘do as I say’ mentality and simply get our men to follow instructions with no questions asked. However this is no longer the most effective method of getting the people to accomplish their tasks. We must get our servicemen to be responsible for their actions, and be accountable for the work they produce. When everyone adopts such an attitude, the safety framework becomes more robust.

1 Definition extracted from SAF Dictionary.


FOCUS

24

Expanding Capabilities - A Safety O

fficer’s Perspective

CULTURE

In order to have robust processes and people who are committed to ensuring safety in their work, a strong safety culture in the unit is important. This is in tandem with one of the RSAF’s safety principles that ‘Safety is an individual, team and command responsibility’. To develop a strong safety culture within 203 SQN, the management first provides the emphasis on safety and lead the way in embracing safety as a way of life in the unit. We constantly remind our servicemen that they need to think safety and act safely in every facet of their daily routines, not just within their jobs but even in their personal lives such as when driving. The inculcation of our servicemen into the safety culture of the unit commences from the day that they are posted in, and the safety team and management continue to engage them through the various safety programs and/or briefs throughout their time in the unit.

Whilst the management can provide the emphasis on safety, the individual must internalise and subscribe to the safety culture and believe that ‘zero accident is an achievable goal’. They are encouraged to play a part in safety within the unit, for example, reporting of any hazards, accidents or incidents. Our servicemen believe that ‘Open Reporting is mandatory for accident prevention’, and always look out for one another and practice crew resource management (CRM) to ensure that the job is always completed safely. To improve this, we can strengthen our recognition or rewards framework to promote an open reporting culture or commend our servicemen for safe acts displayed while discharging their duties.

ENVIRONMENT

To build a strong safety culture, it is necessary to create a conducive environment that plants the seeds of safety within the unit. This is achieved through publicity efforts such as the dissemination of safety information through email, posters, safety articles and briefs. The unit has also implemented relevant safety programs and tools to enhance safety and learning. For example, the harnessing of replay technology for debriefing sessions enables the trainees to better visualise the scenario and absorb the lessons learnt. This would allow the trainee to know his/her mistakes and avoid repeating the mistake for subsequent training sessions. In addition, the unit also utilised safety tools such as Task Safety Analysis (TSA), Risk Assessment Matrix (RAM) and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (HIRA) to

identify and minimise risks and hazards. By creating a safe and conducive environment for the servicemen to operate in, we increase the safety awareness of our personnel and reinforce the safety culture in the unit.


Expa

ndin

g Ca

pabi

litie

s - A

Saf

ety

Offi

cer’s

Per

spec

tive

POTENTIAL WATCH AREAS

While having a robust safety framework in the unit is important, there are a few watch areas to look out for as we continue to expand our capabilities. This section will address two of these: namely expanding too rapidly and crew fatigue.

Even as we expand our capabilities, we must guard against ‘missionitis’ or the ‘rush factor’. We must continue to conduct the necessary risk identification and mitigation, and ensuring that everyone is on board before we forge ahead to the next step. As new procedures and profiles are introduced, we must constantly monitor our progress and be ready to activate contingency plans if necessary.

As a 24/7 ops unit, fatigue might creep in as our servicemen take on new tasks and roles. For example, when new systems are introduced, our personnel would need to perform additional servicing while maintaining the current systems. We must be careful not to overload them with too many new tasks such that their normal work processes are compromised. Otherwise, they may suffer from slips and lapses arising from fatigue.

To address this problem, prudent management of available resources is crucial. The amount of resources available in any unit is limited. The management must decide how much and how quickly to expand the unit’s capabilities to avoid stretching the unit beyond its limits.

To balance between continuity and change, it must continually garner feedback and feel the pulse of the squadron. By adopting a ‘people first’ philosophy, the unit will be able to expand its capabilities and achieve mission success, while ensuring safety always.

CONCLUSION

‘Zero accident is an indicator of operational capability’. Having a robust and comprehensive safety framework in the unit minimises the likelihood of accidents. 203 SQN’s safety framework focuses on four key areas: ensuring that the SOPs and processes are sound; getting the servicemen to be responsible for the work they do and own the outcome; inculcating a strong safety culture; and creating a safe and conducive environment for everyone to operate in. While we expand our capabilities,we must guard against ‘missionitis’ and the ‘rush factor’. To balance continuity and change, the unit must manage the resources wisely to avoid stretching the unit beyond its limits. Adopting a ‘people first’ philosophy ensures that the unit is able to expand its capabilities while ensuring safety always.


FOCUS

26

Expanding Capabilities - A Safety O

fficer’s Perspective


TNI AU Safety Exchange Visit

The 02/12 CAF Quarterly Safety Forum was successfully conducted on 31st July 12 at Changi Air Base (West) auditorium. The forum was organised in conjunction with Air Manpower Department (AMD) to promote awareness and educate servicemen on safety and HR matters in the RSAF. Several Cardinal Awards were also given to the units in recognition of their cardinal effort and achievement.

The 9th Annual Safety Exchange between the RSAF and TNI AU was successfully conducted from 12 – 14 September 2012 in Singapore. The 5-man safety delegation was led by Head of Work and Flight Safety, Air Force Marshal (AFM) Ras Rendro Bowo Sukmono. AFI shared the RSAF’s Safety Management System, Accident Prevention programmes and safety track records. The delegation was also given a tour of the Night Lab, Human Training Centrifuge and Spatial Disorientation Trainer at AFMS.

Safe

ty A

ctiv

itie

s

CAF Quarterly Safety Forum

National University Health System (NUHS) Grand Rounds

HAFI was invited to the NUHS Grand Rounds on 10 August 2012 to talk about safety in the RSAF. HAFI shared the RSAF’s safety culture with the audience of surgeons, doctors, nurses and hospital administrators. It was well received as some of the safety programmes were applicable to promote safer patient care in the hospitals.

Expanding capabilities should not be done at the expense of safety of the personnel in the unit. As we

operationalise new capabilities, it is very easy for management to overly focus on achieving operational

status and allow safety to be ‘forgotten’ or ‘sidelined’. Therefore, it is critical for management and everyone

at all levels to consciously adhere to the established processes and SOPs, constantly be reminded of the

potential blind spots which can become latent issues that may lead to an unfortunate incident.

Anonymous – HQ ADG

“

“

AFI hosted the annual safety affiliation programme with the Army Safety Inspectorate and Navy Inspectorate on 15 August 2012 at the PLAB Officers’ Mess. Safety lessons and challenges from the respective services were shared and discussed. Case studies from cross-service training and operations were also conducted. Overall, the cross sharing of lessons learnt and best practices were excellent.

AFI/ASI/NIS Safety Affiliation Programme

What Our People Think


FOCUS

28

Safety Activities

During a training mission on 12 July 12, there was a malfunction in a UAV’s downlink to the Ground Control Station. As a result, critical information on the UAV’s instruments and engine parameters were not received by the Internal Pilot (IP).

The IP immediately executed a pre-programmed navigation mode to fly the UAV to a pre-determined location, while attempting to re-establish the downlink of the UAV. This was not successful. Close co-ordination was effected with Tengah Tower to de-conflict with all other aircraft operating in the area and facilitate recovery of the UAV. The crew subsequently commanded the UAV for descent and handover to the External Pilot(EP) to execute a visual recovery. Without the support of telemetry inputs from the IP, the EP had to rely heavily on geographical references to acquire, fly and land the UAV visually.

For displaying professionalism, outstanding vigilance and good intra-cockpit CRM in handling the emergency, MAJ Dennis Tay, MAJ Chew Shih Han, ME3 G. Kernabalan ME3 Lim Boon Chong were awarded the Outstanding Safety Award.


The 6th AnnualAuditors’ Workshop

Outstanding Safety Awards – UTS, AFTC

Safe

ty A

ctiv

itie

s / C

ross

wor

d Pu

zzle

The 6th Annual Auditors’ Workshop co-oragnised by AFI and QAB was held at Sembawang Country Club on 17 Aug 2012. 79 auditors from RSAF Ops, Logs, Admin and Intel communities got together to level up on audit knowledge and skills, sharpen audit report writing and learn to share auditor’s experience in eSILK. HAFI and HAL also took this opportunity to welcome new auditors to the community.

In recognising their contributions, ME4 Lim Seh Wah from ACC QAC, ME3 Tan Hood Eng and ME3 Chan Eng Seng from APGC QAC were awarded the WY 11/12 Outstanding Auditor’s Award.

7 RSAF units were also awarded the Occupational Safety and health Assessment Series (OHSAS) 18001 Type B certification by HAFI.

RSAF Safety Warriors’ Course


FOCUS

30

* Answers can be found in this issue of FOCUS

Safety Activities / Crossw

ord Puzzle

Safety Crossword Puzzle

FOCUS #72Crossword Puzzle Winners:1. ME2 Ivy Lim 8FSD2. ME2 Chan Yeow Teck 208 SQN3. ME3 Ang Eng Choon AETI, AFTC

Email your answers with your Rank/Name, NRIC, Unit and Contact details to 2WO Steven Goh before 30th Nov 2012.

All correct entries will be balloted and 3 winners will receive a $30 Popular Voucher each.

The crossword puzzle is open to all RSAF personnel except personnel from AFI and the FOCUS Editorial Board.

21- 30 August 2012

23 August 2012

Workplace Safety Visit to SilkAir

FOCUS - MINDEF

Documents

Transcript of FOCUS - MINDEF