Improvement of VFR\/IFR changeover procedures: Safety recommendations of the BFU after fatal accident<\/p>\n\n\n\n
On October 2021<\/strong> a Piper PA34-220T took off from Bonn-Hangelar on a flight to Hamburg. The pilot, who had a Instrument rating (IR)<\/strong> had a Z flight plan<\/strong> which provided for a change from VFR to IFR as soon as the Waypoint BAMSU<\/strong>about 27 nautical miles north-east of the take-off airfield. The planned cruising altitude was FL 120<\/strong> (12,000 feet). However, shortly after take-off, the aircraft collided with rising terrain in poor weather conditions (instrument meteorological conditions, IMC) in the Siebengebirge<\/strong>which resulted in the death of the pilot and passenger.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The BFU investigation<\/strong> revealed that the aircraft flew into the terrain at a constant altitude and high speed. This indicates a Controlled Flight Into Terrain (CFIT)<\/strong> in which a fully functional aircraft flies into the ground due to pilot error or a lack of situational awareness. The BFU concludes that the pilot probably assumed that he would be able to climb in time to take up the IFR flight, but underestimated the danger posed by the ascending terrain.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The BFU identified several factors that contributed to the accident:<\/p>\n\n\n\n This last point in particular is emphasised in the report. Class G airspace, which is considered uncontrolled airspace, only allows IFR flights under certain conditions, which played a key role in this case. According to the BFU, better integration of IFR procedures in uncontrolled airspace would be necessary to increase safety.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Based on this analysis, the BFU issues several safety recommendations. The aim is to make procedures safer when switching from VFR to IFR and, in particular, to improve communication between pilots and air traffic controllers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Recommendation 06\/2024<\/strong>The BFU calls for the Air navigation service providers<\/strong> to ensure that the responsible sector of the area control centre can be contacted before take-off. This would allow the individual transponder code to be transmitted before take-off in difficult weather conditions, which would speed up the identification of the aircraft and flight coordination. This would save time and possibly prevent accidents, especially in critical weather conditions such as those that prevailed during the accident.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Recommendation 07\/2024<\/strong>: A further recommendation is directed at the Federal Ministry for Digital and Transport Affairs (BMDV)<\/strong>. It is proposed that the Airspace structure in Germany<\/strong> in such a way that IFR flights in uncontrolled airspace (Class G airspace) are safely possible in compliance with European regulations (SERA). This could significantly improve safety for instrument flights in uncontrolled airspace.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The accident report casts a critical light on the Practice of VFR\/IFR change procedures<\/strong> in Germany. These procedures are Aeronautical Information Publication AIP Germany<\/strong> under ENR 1.8<\/strong> regulated. Pilots who are planning a flight under IFR must complete an IFR check before entering controlled airspace. Air traffic control clearance<\/strong> to catch up. However, there are restrictions, such as the need to switch to or above the Minimum Vectoring Altitude (MVA)<\/strong> to be carried out.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Another problem that the BFU addresses is the Missing integration of IFR clearances before take-off<\/strong> for flights from uncontrolled aerodromes. In the specific case of the Piper PA34-220T, the pilot was only able to request an IFR clearance after take-off. One Telephone IFR release<\/strong> before the start was only available to a small group, such as the Federal Police<\/strong>possible. Such a procedure for all pilots could significantly improve flight coordination and safety.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The BFU compares the German VFR\/IFR changeover procedure with international practices. In some other countries, this procedure is routinely offered to all road users, which leads to greater efficiency and safety. The BFU is of the opinion that a similar procedure in Germany could help to minimise the Time required for communication and coordination<\/strong> and thus prevent potential accidents.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The accident involving the Piper PA34-220T has revealed serious deficiencies in the VFR\/IFR alternate procedures and in Germany's airspace structure. The BFU's recommendations are clear: a Improving communication<\/strong>the Timeliness of transponder code assignment<\/strong> and a Adaptation of the national airspace structure<\/strong> are crucial to preventing such tragic accidents in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Organisations such as the AOPA-Germany<\/strong> welcome the recommendations and call for their swift implementation. Modernising the procedures would not only increase efficiency, but above all improve safety for everyone involved in general aviation.<\/p>\n\n\n\nRoot cause analysis: human and systemic errors<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
\n
BFU recommendations: Improve communication and the procedure<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
VFR\/IFR alternate procedures: Challenges and opportunities<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
A look at international procedures<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Conclusion: Necessary reforms for more security<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n