The Director General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) has issued an advisory to all airlines to instruct their crew not to hesitate to seek “follow me” vehicle service during poor visibility at airports.
The safety guidelines follow after an investigation into a recent accident revealed that the aircraft, while taxiing to the bay, entered an open drain and suffered extensive damage. The runway markings were not visible due to rain over the airfield. The Pilot in Command manoeuvred the aircraft, ignoring the advice of the Pilot Monitoring’s request for a “follow me” vehicle service for taxi to the bay.
The DGCA in the advisory issued early this month said during the aircraft ground operations on an aerodrome, operational and/or environmental issues such as human factors, airport design, crew technique, etc., affected the performance of the flight crew. A deterioration in performance may lead to runway or taxiway incursion.
“One of the major contributing factors for runway/taxiway incursions is the lack of situational awareness of the flight crew during ground operations at an airport wherein visibility has reduced due to weather considerations. Accordingly for low visibility operations, ‘follow me’ services are recommended,” the advisory said.
Referring to an Airports Authority of India circular issued in 2011 which recommended use of “follow me” vehicle for guiding the aircraft until such time the pilot reported having sighted the parking/docking guidance signal, the DGCA advised aircraft operators to sensitise their flight crew to inform the Air Traffic Control and not to hesitate to request for “follow me” vehicle service at any time when they had doubts about their location or experienced difficulty in navigating aircraft on ground due to water logging, poor visibility, etc.
In 2017, an Air India Express flight IX-452 from Abu Dhabi to Kochi with 102 passengers on board landed in an open drain amid heavy rains. The accident left three passengers injured and the aircraft heavily damaged. Investigation into the incident revealed that the Pilot in Command had not taken his co-pilot’s suggestion or warning at the time of landing.
