Page 6 - InterPilot Vol 1 No 3
P. 6


Committee issues radiation

protection recommendations

“Whereas the annual exposures of is IFALPA policy that this paragraph assessment and recording for crew
ground-based radiation workers have been should apply to all airplanes operated members involved in operations above
successfully reduced, airline flight crew above 8,000 m (26,000 ft) operating in 8,000 m (26,000 ft)
exposures remain at levels substantially polar/subpolar regions. 9. Pregnant flight crew warnings
above those of other radiation workers 3. Measures against sudden increases Flight crew members should be warned
and are increasing with modern flight in dose rates that radiation exposure to the fetus
operations. Therefore, there is an IFALPA recommends coordination with should not exceed the general population
immediate requirement for comprehensive its Air Traffic Services (ATS) Committee limit of 1.0 mSv.
research into cosmic radiation exposures in for the possibility of aircraft diversions 10. Alternative airport security controls
airline pilots.” That’s the recommendation due to an ionizing radiation event, and if Flight crew members should not be
of an IFALPA Position Paper developed warranted to recommend that ICAO take exposed to any kind of ionizing radiation
by the Human Performance (HUPER) the matter up within its existing subject emitted by security scanning devices (eg,
Committee, issued in September. matter expert groups. x-ray backscatter).
The IFALPA guidance is that operators 4. Dose rate warning devices on There are limited means available
should be legally obliged to take measures board aircraft to reduce exposure to ionizing radiation –
to reduce in-flight radiation exposures During flight, the cockpit crew should to fly lower, to fly less, and/or to avoid
for flight crews below the 20 mSv have the warning function display high exposures of certain groups (equalize
(millisieverts) limit established by the plainly visible in order to allow timely exposures). Shielding of aircraft is not
International Commission on Radiological response to suddenly increased levels feasible due to weight and extremely high
Protection (ICRP) in 2007 – applying of dose rates. radiation particle energies.
the ALARA (As Low As Reasonably 5. Dose minimization through flight Reducing exposure times by flying
Achievable) principle, taking into account plan optimization fewer hours may coincide positively with
economic and social considerations. 6. Dose and Dose-Rate Effectiveness efforts to reduce yearly limits of flight
IFALPA’s recommendations include: Factor (DDREF) hours in the interest of flight safety. Crew
1. Recognition of flight personnel Currently, there is uncertainty regarding members may influence their lifelong
as Category A occupationally the DDREF of 2, as recommended by radiation exposures by making use of their
exposed workers ICRP for calculating effective dose. options: selection of aircraft types flown,
2. Dose measuring devices on IFALPA sees the necessity to clarify short-haul or long-haul operations,
board aircraft the validity of this factor. retirement age.
Present ICAO SARPs refer to airplanes 7. Education of flight crew The complete Position Paper is available
operated above 15,000 m (49,000 ft); it 8. Cumulative radiation dosage on the IFALPA website.

IFALPA reaffirms position on cruise relief pilots

In a Position Paper on “Cruise relief pilots,” For PIC relief, IFALPA’s position is that split of tasks from the beginning of duty
issued in September, IFALPA reaffirmed a cruise relief pilot should hold an ATPL to its end should also be specified.
that all pilots should be fully qualified on license. For co-pilot relief, the license should The IFALPA Position Paper also
type, and therefore opposes the creation be a CPL, MPL or ATPL. For both PIC and addresses line instruction and recurrent
of a specific “relief pilot” license. co-pilot relief, the relief pilot license holder training recommendations.
A cruise relief pilot relieves the pilot- should have a valid type rating on the type. “PIC cruise relief should be considered
in-command (PIC) or co-pilot of his/her A comprehensive policy should specify as an intermediate step towards PIC, and
duties at the controls during the cruise the circumstances where PIC relief is not just a cost-saving provision,” IFALPA
phase of a flight in multi-pilot operations terminated, and the PIC is required back states. The full Position Paper can be
above FL200. in the cockpit and/or at the controls. The found at

Vol 1 | No 3 | October 2013 InterPilot | The Safety and Technical Journal of IFALPA
   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11