SAFETY FIRST Safety-Related Information and Resources from the Vertical Aviation Safety Team
What’s the Warranted Risk You Will Accept?
By CDR Dave McCarthy, chief, Safety Training and Standardization Division, U.S. Coast Guard
One dark night on the San Diego coast, my crew was launched for law enforcement to intercept a drug-laden “panga” en route from Mexico to the U.S. We got the intel from our command center and launched into the blackness to find our panga. As we headed west over the Pacific Ocean with our radar scanning the surface of the water and our night vision goggles tuned up, we encountered declining ceilings at 1,000 feet AWL. We continued our search pattern at 700 feet and as the evening got cooler, the ceilings got lower. When we went down to 500 feet AWL, we discussed our hard deck of 200 feet AWL and termination of the search. We went down to 300 feet, and finally at 200 feet we reached our limit and returned to base. The risk to my crew in declining ceilings was not worth the gain of finding the drug runner.
The U.S. Coast Guard, as a federal law enforcement agency, conducts aviation law enforcement (LE) missions enforcing U.S. law within our territorial waters as well as international laws abroad. We conduct aviation LE missions in conjunction with allied countries, including the Bahamas and Turks and Caicos in the Caribbean. We conduct shipboard LE missions on the high seas and land-based LE operations, as well as national defense and ports, waterways, and coastal security missions.
What risk should Coast Guard crews take to prosecute a mission? How much risk do you take with LE to accomplish the mission?
Warranted risk for missions involving general law enforcement and evidence recovery, as defined in the Coast Guard Operations Manual, CIM 3710.1 (series) states: “The possibility of recovering evidence and interdicting or apprehending alleged violators of federal law does not warrant probable damage to or abuse of the aircraft.” Contrast this to the risk for search and rescue, and saving human life: “If a mission is likely to save human
life, it warrants a maximum effort. When no suitable alternatives exist and the mission has a reasonable chance of success, the risk of damage to or abuse of the aircraft is acceptable, even though such damage or abuse may render the aircraft unrecoverable. Probable loss of the aircrew is not an acceptable risk.”
Does a minor overtorque during an LE mission mean that our aircrews are intentionally violating policy to prosecute a mission? It could mean that in order to maintain a proper safety margin, the crew increased the collective and momentarily overtorqued. In the safety world, we are always trying to ensure that margins exist so our crews can return home to their families. If the overtorque is done with good intentions and not used to intentionally reduce the margin, the abuse is justified. A “just” safety culture is preserved when these unintentional errors are met with grace and ample opportunity to share the lessons learned.
How does your agency limit or gauge risk? Do you have acceptable risks for various missions? Do your aircrews know how far to go in order to accomplish the tasked mission? As law enforcement agents, we Coasties want to valiantly uphold the laws, but we must do it in a prudent fashion. The potential loss of aircrew or damage to aircraft has been deemed as outside the risk tolerance for the general LE mission.
It may be difficult, however, to remain objective and unemotional when prosecuting an LE mission. As aviators, we must realize that the risk to our crew must always be weighed against the gain of the mission. Is the loss of an aircrew and aircraft acceptable to accomplish the mission? How about damage to the aircraft? These questions should be answered well in advance, and the organizational culture should support and defend the warranted risk for LE missions.
The Vertical Aviation Safety Team (VAST), US Helicopter Safety Team (USHST), and several regional safety teams offer valuable information and resources. Finally, readers can view the “56 Seconds to Live” YouTube video and complete the companion training course that helps pilots understand the hazards and consequences of continued VFR flight into IMC and offers them the tools they need to avoid becoming the next fatal accident victim.
18 May/June 2023
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84
