European Commission aviation blacklist

Join this forum to discuss the latest news that happened in the world of commercial aviation.

Moderator: Latest news team

SN30952
Posts: 7153
Joined: 31 Jul 2003, 00:00

The blacklist of EU regulators.

Post by SN30952 » 16 Feb 2005, 19:00

Jonathan Stearns of the Bloomberg's Brussels' office writes:
European Union regulators proposed to blacklist EU airlines with poor safety records in a draft law that would also require tour operators such as TUI AG to disclose the carriers booked for customers.

We @ Luchtzakwrote: Worst Flight Ever: TUI Airlines Belgium BRU-PUJ-MBJ-YYT-BRU

The plan to widen the blacklisting of airlines and force tour operators to identify carriers results from the January 2004 crash into the Red Sea of an Egyptian charter plane bound for Paris.

User avatar
Avro
Posts: 8866
Joined: 28 Apr 2003, 00:00
Location: Belgium

First steps toward a unifed European blacklist

Post by Avro » 16 Nov 2005, 17:19

I just heard the news on the radio and it is confirmed on the following link: http://europa.eu.int/rapid/pressRelease ... anguage=en

It seems that Europe has finally decided to unify its forces and to form ONE blacklist. Let's see how the idea will further develop.

Chris

EDIT: link
Last edited by Avro on 21 Nov 2005, 16:56, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
SN_Bigbirdy
Posts: 360
Joined: 15 Nov 2005, 00:00
Location: Hoegaarden

blacklist

Post by SN_Bigbirdy » 16 Nov 2005, 18:52

I guess this is a good move. Good companies will be set apart from less better companies.
Nevertheless I like to know how they will determine when a plane needs to be blacklisted. If they begin to say that airplanes older than 16y. are not airworthy anymore, some freighters could face probs I guess...

grtz,
Simon

User avatar
Atlantis
Posts: 4053
Joined: 12 Apr 2005, 00:00

Post by Atlantis » 16 Nov 2005, 19:15

The age is less important. Some old planes are very good or even better.

Airlines who are blacklisted are airlines with some crashes or serious technical malfunctions and maintenance papers who are nor correct.

It's a very good signal to the airlines that they not play with pax lives and only want get high profits. Pax should also know which airline bring them to their destination.

Belgium and France are the pioneers of this European blacklist.

LX-LGX
Posts: 2004
Joined: 20 Jan 2004, 00:00
Location: ANR

Post by LX-LGX » 16 Nov 2005, 22:32

press release in Dutch:

http://www.europarl.eu.int/news/expert/ ... ult_nl.htm


press release in French:

http://www.europarl.eu.int/news/expert/ ... ult_fr.htm


press release in all other EU-languages:

just open one of the above links, and change language (on top of the page, right hand site)

regi
Posts: 5139
Joined: 02 Sep 2004, 00:00
Location: Bruges

Post by regi » 16 Nov 2005, 22:36

bye bye MK and Kalita?

n5528p
Posts: 315
Joined: 16 Jun 2005, 00:00

Post by n5528p » 17 Nov 2005, 08:56

Well... a small step in the right direction.

Still, said lists are useless if the checks identifying the dangerous airlines are not executed more often.

Regards, Bernhard

User avatar
Avro
Posts: 8866
Joined: 28 Apr 2003, 00:00
Location: Belgium

Post by Avro » 17 Nov 2005, 11:05

Well IMHO to make a blacklist is not the best idea there is.
Of course some airlines should be banned I don't deny that but it would be better to make a kind of quality label. Airlines that are really top should get a quality label.

By doing so, it will not only give some good advertisment for those airlines, but the airlines which are not that good and nearly on the blacklist will try to get that quality label as well and automatically improve their safety.
A quality label would not mean that the airlines not having them are not safe at all, but that they could still improve.

Publishing a list of airlines which are banned won't help the normal pax to decide which airline he:she will fly since the banned airline cannot come anymore... Furthermore blacklists tend to make some negative publicity of safety in aviation.

User avatar
SN_Bigbirdy
Posts: 360
Joined: 15 Nov 2005, 00:00
Location: Hoegaarden

Post by SN_Bigbirdy » 17 Nov 2005, 11:50

" Member States may also impose an operating ban on an air carrier, not included on the list, "in view of a safety problem specifically affecting that Member State". "

So countries do not have to follow the list: is the list only a guideline and are the countries still rather free in their decisions?

grtz,
Simon
If you can count the blades of my engines while they work, you are too close to be save
My pictures @ Jetphotos.net: http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=10039

Bowlie
Posts: 55
Joined: 19 Jul 2005, 00:00
Location: Geneva

Post by Bowlie » 17 Nov 2005, 14:13

IMHO this is just a media campain to give the idea that the European Parliment is actually good for something. With the exception of Flash, who no longer exists, none of the airlines on the lists have actually had a crash in the last years. Air Kyro has never flow to Europe.

Also Phucket Airlines, made the French list within one month of being approved by the French DCAC for flights to France, and according to them - the first they heard of it was from the press. So much for transparency.

It would be nice if the EP or the EC actually did something that improved safety, rather than things that get them a few lines in newspapers as our savoirs.

Isn't interesting that not one of the airlines that had an incident this summer will make the list - Air France, Inter-Tunis, Helios, West Caribbean ect.

bigjulie

Post by bigjulie » 19 Nov 2005, 00:38

If it is in the interests of safety, it's a step in the right direction :wink:

Bowlie
Posts: 55
Joined: 19 Jul 2005, 00:00
Location: Geneva

Post by Bowlie » 19 Nov 2005, 17:54

But Julius - it is not in the interest of safety, it is in the interests in polititcs - and that is not in the interest of safety.

LJ
Posts: 851
Joined: 14 Mar 2004, 00:00
Location: Alkmaar NL

Post by LJ » 19 Nov 2005, 21:55

Also Phucket Airlines, made the French list within one month of being approved by the French DCAC for flights to France, and according to them - the first they heard of it was from the press. So much for transparency
Incorrect, Phuket was banned from France following similar bans in both UK and The Netherlands. The fact that they never flew to France is thus irrelevant as Onur didn't have much problems in France either but did receive a ban following the ban in The Netherlands.
Air Kyro has never flow to Europe.
Thus?????? If there is evidence the airline is not up to EU standards I don't see why we have to wait untill they actually start flying to Europe before banning them
Well IMHO to make a blacklist is not the best idea there is.
Of course some airlines should be banned I don't deny that but it would be better to make a kind of quality label.
Avro, this has been discussed as the European consumers organisations wanted this. However there are very big problems implementing such a quality label (when do you get which label?). Moreover there is a basic problem as some argue that safety is a black or white issue. You are either safe (and thus allowed to fly) or unsafe (and thus not allow to fly). Anything in between is difficult to asses and can create confusion.

Bowlie
Posts: 55
Joined: 19 Jul 2005, 00:00
Location: Geneva

Post by Bowlie » 20 Nov 2005, 11:19

Have a look at this editorial in Air Transport World.
A couple of highlights:
Perhaps instead of a questionable quick-fix solution, the EU should take a long-range view, one that seeks to improve the overall standard of safety. [...] Alternatively, it could require that airlines operating to and within the EU undergo and pass a safety audit under IATA's well-regarded Operational Safety Audit program.
This would cost nothing to implement, simple - to the point and effective!

and
A blacklist will not close Europe's Swiss cheese of regulatory loopholes, but it will take politicians off the hook for their failure to adopt a unified standard of air safety across the EU. That is the nub of the matter, and that is unlikely to change so long as simplistic solutions make it possible to avoid difficult ones.
I'm all for safety, but I am against regulators lying to me. Blacklists will do nothing to improve my safety. How about something that does?

User avatar
SN_Bigbirdy
Posts: 360
Joined: 15 Nov 2005, 00:00
Location: Hoegaarden

Post by SN_Bigbirdy » 29 Nov 2005, 21:33

I found this article on luchtvaartnieuws.nl

apparently the rapports that the International Bureau of Aviation (IBA)
drew up, were not quiet true. Every item they found to ground the planes of Onur were not realy necessary to ground those planes...

Were the problems with Onur not one of the reasons to draw up a blacklist?
I always feared that governments will ground planes for the tiniest reason and the rapports of IBA are a proof of that...

Any reaction about this?

grtz;
Simon

source: http://www.luchtvaartnieuws.nl/news/?id=11347 ('Feiten uit inspectierapporten IVW niet gerechtvaardigd')
If you can count the blades of my engines while they work, you are too close to be save
My pictures @ Jetphotos.net: http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=10039

User avatar
Av24.be
Posts: 4448
Joined: 09 Nov 2003, 00:00
Contact:

Buraq not longer on EU blacklist?

Post by Av24.be » 06 Jul 2006, 09:18

Libyan private airline "Buraq" announced that the European Commission has removed its name from the blacklist.

airazurxtror
Posts: 3789
Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 00:00

Additions to the European blacklist

Post by airazurxtror » 08 Apr 2009, 18:00

One-Two-Go, with an Ukrainian and six Kazakstan carriers, plus one more African country : Bénin - are new additions to the European blacklist :

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... anned.html

http://ec.europa.eu/transport/air-ban/pdf/list_en.pdf

LX-LGX
Posts: 2004
Joined: 20 Jan 2004, 00:00
Location: ANR

Re: Additions to the European blacklist

Post by LX-LGX » 08 Apr 2009, 21:45

Luckily they've still banned S2-ADT (from Air Bangladesh).

Imagine this one starts flying to BRU:
http://www.flugzeugbilder.net/spotterbr ... hp?id=7926

N801KH is (was) the new reg from S2-ADT. Scrapped indeed, in 2007. Still banned in 2009 - just to make sure, perhaps.

LX-LGX
Posts: 2004
Joined: 20 Jan 2004, 00:00
Location: ANR

Re: Additions to the European blacklist

Post by LX-LGX » 08 Apr 2009, 23:30

Overview:

All carriers from:
- Angola
- Benin
- Equatorial Guinea
- Indonesia
- Kyrgyz Republic
- Liberia
- Sierra Leone
- Swaziland
- Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC)
- Gabon - but Gabon Airlines and Afrijet have exemptions for a small number of aircraft

16 individual carriers:
- Ariana Afghan Airlines (Afghanistan)
- Siem Reap Airways International (Cambodia)
- Air Koryo (Democratic People's Republic of Korea)
- Air Company Kokshetau (Kazakhstan)
- ATMA Airlines (Kazakhstan)
- Berkut Air (Kazakhstan)
- East Wing (Kazakhstan)
- Sayat Air (Kazakhstan)
- Starline KZ (Kazakhstan)
- Silverback Cargo Freighters (Rwanda)
- Air West (Sudan)
- One Two Go Airlines (Thailand)
- Motor Sich Airlines (Ukraine)
- Ukraine Cargo Airways (Ukraine)
- Ukraine Mediterranean Airlines (Ukraine)
- Volare Aviation (Ukraine)

regi
Posts: 5139
Joined: 02 Sep 2004, 00:00
Location: Bruges

Re: Additions to the European blacklist

Post by regi » 09 Apr 2009, 11:29

First of all:
the ban speaks about 1-2 Go but not about the mother company Orient Thai.
I am surprised that 1-2 Go was added to the list after they were released in Thailand.
Mr. Udom will not be happy. Just now that Airasia started low cost flights Gatwick-Kuala Lumpur, he might have thought to do the same.

By the way, what happened eventually with the Tri Stars of Mr. Udom, which were deliberately damaged at Tapao airport some years ago ? ( no, I am not day dreaming about Tri Stars in a full economy seat lay out picking up tourists at Brussels )

I doubt if we will see 1-2 Go and/or Orient Thai in Eurpean airspace after the Phuket Air collapse.

Post Reply