2013/02/22
リスク対策ドットコム英語版>記事
the 2010 eruption of Eyjafjallajokull, the most recent eruption to affect the UK, was small. However it caused the biggest disruption to European air travel since WW2 as the position of the eruption was such that it ejected ash into the Jet stream. For 5 days air travel over most of Europe was halted, affecting over 100,000 travelers some of whom resorted to twitter to ask for temporary accommodation and assistance.
The Airline industry was the most severely affected, as with all airspace closed re-booking or rerouting flights was not an option. Hotels and Tourist areas were also impacted as were industries that depended on airfreight. An aviation business continuity expert has kindly shared his views on best practice gained from the experience of 2010. 1. Government Agencies need to have available Ash Cloud Forecasting and Monitoring Equipments. The aircraft which usually fly over UK to measure the density and distribution of ash at various levels of altitude, was unfortunately parked in a hanger for maintenance. 2. The national air traffic service should have a BC plan in place to deal with loss of airspace availability for any reason. All affected parties should work together on a national plan. The National Air Traffic Service (NATS) had declared the flow rates in various ATC (Air Traffic Control) sectors throughout UK that it could provide service to. The airlines agreed on a pro rata these flow rates among themselves based on their normal level of traffic and thus make their own decisions about which flights to operate or cancel. 3. Priority should be given to flights which have few alternatives, over those where alternatives do exist. e.g. where good road and rail networks exist, domestic flights should be cancelled in order to allow long-haul overseas flights to operate where capacity is severely reduced. However for this to work, it will be necessary to arrange for extra coach and train services to be laid on to cope with the additional passengers and likewise extra road haulage for essential cargo. 4. Government meteorologists and airline flight planners should be working together. Enabling airline planners to understand the most likely spread of ash cloud at various levels and consider alternative routings for flights to avoid the ash or fly at sub optimal flight levels (from a fuel efficiency point of view). Where the rerouting is significant and beyond an aircraft's range, the airlines should consider en route stops for fuel uplift. This may result in crew flight time limitation issues, the need for additional catering uplift etc and arrangements will need to be in hand (eg handling agreements where such calls are at airports not normally used by the airline). 5. The Government should not seek to set airline priorities, just inform airlines of which airspace is considered safe. There will likely be issues raised about such things as should business traffic get priority over leisure traffic. These are pointless and agreement will not be reached. If the Government makes such a decision it will render itself liable to claims for compensation by the aggrieved parties. Wholly leisure airlines would be threatened with bankruptcy etc. Priority should be given to flights which have few alternatives, over those where alternatives do exist. 6. Finally, even the best business continuity planning will not enable normal operations in circumstance with wide spread impact. There will be mass disruption in the form of delays and cancellations and the planning must include how such widespread disruption will be managed.●This article was translated into Japanese and published on magazine "Risk-taisaku.com"
vol.35.
◆Profile Samantha Ueno, TIEMS Social Media Manager. Presently studying MPhil Technology Policy at University of Cambridge (Judges Business School). Voluntarily run the Social Media communication strategy of The International Emergency Management Society (www.TIEMS.info). "Samantha's BCP English" has been serialized in the Risk-taisaku.com magazine. Her current interests is on Technology and Organisational Reliance.
リスク対策ドットコム英語版>記事の他の記事
- An ‘App’ for everything; But can Apps for Disaster save lives?
- Once upon a time in Fukushima
- UK experience of the Impact of Volcanic Eruptions
- BS25999 Certification Is No Guarantee of a Robust, Fit-for-purpose Business Continuity Capability
- A need to re-think the trade-off between continuity and productivity
おすすめ記事
-
-
-
リスク対策.com編集長が斬る!今週のニュース解説
毎週火曜日(平日のみ)朝9時~、リスク対策.com編集長 中澤幸介と兵庫県立大学教授 木村玲欧氏(心理学・危機管理学)が今週注目のニュースを短く、わかりやすく解説します。
2024/12/24
-
-
-
能登の二重被災が語る日本の災害脆弱性
2024 年、能登半島は二つの大きな災害に見舞われました。この多重被災から見えてくる脆弱性は、国全体の問題が能登という地域で集約的に顕在化したもの。能登の姿は明日の日本の姿にほかなりません。近い将来必ず起きる大規模災害への教訓として、能登で何が起きたのかを、金沢大学准教授の青木賢人氏に聞きました。
2024/12/22
-
製品供給は継続もたった1つの部品が再開を左右危機に備えたリソースの見直し
2022年3月、素材メーカーのADEKAの福島・相馬工場が震度6強の福島県沖地震で製品の生産が停止した。2009年からBCMに取り組んできた同工場にとって、東日本大震災以来の被害。復旧までの期間を左右したのは、たった1つの部品だ。BCPによる備えで製品の供給は滞りなく続けられたが、新たな課題も明らかになった。
2024/12/20
-
企業には社会的不正を発生させる素地がある
2024年も残すところわずか10日。産業界に最大の衝撃を与えたのはトヨタの認証不正だろう。グループ会社のダイハツや日野自動車での不正発覚に続き、後を追うかたちとなった。明治大学商学部専任講師の會澤綾子氏によれば企業不正には3つの特徴があり、その一つである社会的不正が注目されているという。會澤氏に、なぜ企業不正は止まないのかを聞いた。
2024/12/20
-
-
※スパム投稿防止のためコメントは編集部の承認制となっておりますが、いただいたコメントは原則、すべて掲載いたします。
※個人情報は入力しないようご注意ください。
» パスワードをお忘れの方