Page:KAL801Finalreport.pdf/125

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
Factual Information
111
Aircraft Accident Report

recommend that CRM training in LOFT or Special Purpose Operational Training for flight crewmembers contain a CFIT scenario. According to the FAA, this paragraph recommends that the training should emphasize prevention through effective communication and decision behavior and the importance of immediate, decisive, and correct response to a ground proximity warning.

On November 13, 1997, the Safety Board acknowledged the progress made by the FAA but noted that the FAA's response did not indicate that the newly developed CFIT training program was mandatory, as urged by the recommendation. Pending further information from the FAA, Safety Recommendation A-96-95 was classified "Open-- Acceptable Response."

On August 11, 1999, the FAA stated that it had initiated an NPRM proposing to mandate training in CFIT, including flight training in simulators and the ground proximity escape maneuver. The FAA indicated that the NPRM was expected to be published in December 2000.

The Safety Board's evaluation and classification of Safety Recommendation A-96-95 are discussed in section 2.8.

Safety Recommendation A-96-102 asked the FAA to Require that all approach and navigation charts graphically present terrain information.[1]

On December 31, 1996, the FAA stated that it agreed with the intent of this recommendation. However, the FAA stated that it was not necessary to depict terrain on IFR en route low-altitude charts because the off-route obstruction clearance altitudes adequately presented terrain and obstruction clearance information. In addition, the FAA indicated that the Government/Industry Charting Forum, chaired by the FAA's Air Traffic Service, was evaluating the possibility of adding terrain information (contour lines and shading) graphically on approach charts.

On April 11, 1997, the Safety Board stated that, although the FAA's action regarding approach charts was appropriate, the Board did not agree with the FAA that current off-route obstruction clearance altitudes adequately presented terrain and obstruction clearance information. The Board reiterated that the intent of this recommendation was to have terrain information graphically presented on all approach and navigation charts.

On February 19, 1998, the FAA stated that the Task Group 31 from the Air Cartographic Committee (a Government interagency and aviation industry committee) was evaluating the possibility of adding contour lines and shading on the plan view


  1. The Safety Board issued this recommendation because Jeppesen Sanderson was changing the portrayal of terrain on some, rather than all, of its charts. Specifically, Jeppesen was revising approach charts only if they displayed terrain that was above 2,000 feet within 6 miles of an airport; local area charts were being revised only if they displayed terrain that was more than 4,000 feet above the plan view of an airport.