Commercial transport aircraft are required to undergo frequent rigorous checks and tests, developed over the years by its manufacturers who in turn draw on their experience from the many users of the aircraft. Moreover, these maintenance schedules for specific aircraft undergo further vetting by the aviation regulatory authority of the country in which the aircraft is registered. Thus, the NAC’s Boeing-757 aircraft are required to undergo maintenance as per the Civil Aviation Authority of Nepal (CAAN)-approved schedule, more specifically its Airworthiness Department.
Even when the aircraft are flown to facilities for detailed structural inspections (technically called “C” and “D” checks) after clocking say 4000 hours of flight, the CAAN inspectors invariably accompany the aircraft along with NAC’s maintenance control engineers in order to keep an eye on the aircraft’s maintenance and participating in the aircraft’s test flights. Therefore, a question naturally arises: Should CAAN’s airworthiness inspectors along with NAC’s maintenance engineers share the blame for the airworthiness ills pervading the Boeings? After all, they are the ones who issue and renew the aircraft’s Certificates of Airworthiness (technically called the C of A), the techno-legal document that certifies the health of the aircraft?
These Boeing aircraft, or for that matter any large aircraft, are required to possess an exhaustive list of equipment that should remain operative before a flight can commence. This list, which stands approved by CAAN, is technically termed as the (M)inimum (E)quipment (L)ist. The aircraft cannot depart with inoperative items beyond that mentioned in the respective MELs unless such exceptions have been explicitly authorized by CAAN. Multitude of such MEL exceptions granted to NAC, let alone the pay-as-you-fly private operators, within the last three years now definitely warrants public scrutiny.
And, of course, why shouldn’t the foreign-based maintenance facilities too be deemed suspects for improper or inadequate maintenance? Interestingly, such foreign-based maintenance facilities, where these jet aircraft undergo maintenance, are required to be approved by CAAN airworthiness inspectors, who accordingly visit the facilities regularly for inspections (or perhaps under pretence of inspection) for compliance with relevant sections of Nepali airworthiness regulations.
Another major aspect of any maintenance-related incidents when talking of passenger aircraft is its impartial probe, as is practiced worldwide, except in Nepal. Since the airline and its certifying agency, CAAN, together are involved in the maintenance certification of aircraft, they both naturally should be considered suspects for having committed acts of commissions and omissions. Therefore, with the present system of CAAN’s airworthiness wing also donning the role of investigator, the objectivity of the probe stands utterly compromised. Surely, CAAN cannot be expected to find fault with its own office and officers. An Investigation Division recently set-up at CAAN HQs to investigate such air safety incidents, has been lying dysfunctional, as the powerful airworthiness department doesn’t want any other office to scrutinize its murky functioning, while it continues to roll in its filth of incapacity, greed and unaccountability.
A perusal of some of the past reports on recent air crashes, which are posted on the Ministry of Tourism and Civil Aviation’s website, indicate some interesting findings related to the state of airworthiness in Nepal. In one of the cases, the annual flight test of an MI-8 helicopter involved in a crash had been carried out with lesser payload than necessary to demonstrate actual airworthiness. In this regard, shouldn’t the airworthiness certificate issued to the aircraft be termed technically “fake”? Sadly, such acts of wilful negligence continue to go unnoticed and unpunished, perhaps even today!
Many of the civil aircraft that are registered in Nepal carry onboard instruments like the Instrument Landing System (ILS) receivers that are used for precision landing in inclement weather. However, none of Nepal’s airports are presently equipped with this landing aid, due to reasons of terrain as well as lack of foresight on the part of airport operator, again the CAAN. The NAC’s Boeing aircraft that have been granted approval to fly ILS approaches at international airports are also involved in customary annual test flights for renewing their C of A. Since the annual C of A test flights may not always coincide with the C and D checks carried abroad, they are often carried out within Nepal, i.e. the take-offs and landings happen at Tribhuvan International Airport (TIA), so it remains a mystery as to how the proper functioning of the onboard ILS receivers are confirmed annually? Perhaps, in Nepal, airworthiness is confined to paper alone and not the aircraft, and therefore, perhaps, the frequent emergency landings!
Apart from TIA, many airline operators are also based at other domestic airports like Surkhet, from where flight operations to western and far-western airports are being carried out. At times, the number of aircraft based at Surkhet exceeds 10, and yet there are no CAAN airworthiness-inspectors based at Surkhet to carry out continuous surveillance of the aircraft maintenance! Fleeting annual visits by CAAN inspectors continue even today in the name of continuing surveillance, which worldwide is considered the bedrock of aviation safety. Perhaps, it is because of the warm trust between the two parties, the operators and the regulator, or perhaps there is a dearth of standard restaurants and spas in Surkhet to cater to the discerning airworthiness inspectors’ palate and sophisticated tastes, of course, all at the operator’s expenses.
Last but not the least is the prevailing culture of impunity in Nepal that has spilled over in the sphere of aviation, where the violators, on both sides of the fence, go unpunished. Not a single case of judicial investigation to apportion blame for the precious lives lost is known to exist in the annals of Nepali civil aviation despite the significant number of fatal air crashes in the last two decades. While, in USA, Europe as well as East Asia, scores of examples exist to illustrate pilots, aircraft-mechanics, air traffic controllers receiving significant jail terms for errors of omissions and commissions, if the aircraft handled by them are involved in accidents. Nepalis never learn, or will they?
Related story
NAC reports notable improvement in passenger numbers and revenu...
