Aircraft accidents, need for policy and managerial reforms

The pilot Manishratna Shakya was rescued alive in the accident at the Tribhuvan airport complex with 19 crew members on board. His treatment continues. Due to the accident, the plane was completely damaged. This incident has resurfaced the debate on air travel safety in Nepal.

Nepal is one of the countries where plane crashes happen frequently. Before this, 72 people died when a Yeti ship crashed in Pokhara on 1 January 2079. Since the first air accident in Simra in August 2012, till Wednesday, 108 air accidents have happened in Nepal in 69 years. 959 people have died in this process. If you look at the records of the last one decade alone, the list of accidents with various companies' ships during domestic flights, helicopter accidents and human casualties when coming to Nepal from foreign countries is equal to two dozen. The list of non-life-threatening accidents goes on and on. This also seems to have delayed the initiation of planned reforms in our aviation sector.

Although air travel is considered safe around the world, the accident statistics show that the situation in Nepal is just the opposite. Numerically, we are not the most accident-prone country. However, if we compare the geographical area and air pressure, the number of passengers who travel by air and the financial capability of the country-citizen, it can be said that the list of accidents is overwhelming. Stakeholders say that there are some specific causes of air accidents in Nepal.

They say that accidents happen because of weather, complex geographical structure, haphazardly constructed airports, technical aspects of aircraft, profit-seeking tendencies of airline companies, and weakness of pilots. But often human frailty (crew member's weakness) is recorded after the accident. As a result, the subject of reform and its implementation is overshadowed. Due to insufficient work in Nepal's air safety, a series of accidents is going on one after the other. The detailed cause of Wednesday's accident is still open in time, but it is suspected that the suggestions given earlier and given in the future to reduce accidents will be implemented. It is important to take seriously, implement and monitor suggestions received internally and externally for

improvement. The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the European Union (EU) have been giving suggestions and pressure to separate the Civil Aviation Authority of Nepal (CAN) into a service provider and a regulatory body. Due to the failure to do so, Nepal's airspace has not been removed from the safety list (blacklist) of the EU. Nepal has been blacklisted since 2013 after the ICAO report. It used to be criticized as a 'conflict of interest' because two separate and opposite tasks such as service and regulation were carried out by the same organization.

If the surveillance in Nepal's aviation sector was strong, then the ship on the 'ferry flight' (non-commercial flight) for C-Check could not allow so many technicians (including non-technical children) to board. which could have reduced human losses. Stakeholders say that there is weakness from Solar Airlines and the regulatory body authority. This needs to be discussed more over time.

"Nepal Civil Aviation Authority Bill, 2076" and "Nepal Air Services Authority Bill, 2076" were registered in the National Assembly on February 11, 2076 with the aim of separating CAN as a service provider and a regulatory body. However, in the previous term of the House of Representatives, the bill was not passed and became inactive. If the bill were to become a law, the Nepal Civil Aviation Authority would have done the regulation work related to the airspace and the Nepal Civil Aviation Authority would have done the work of the service provider. It would end 'conflict of interest' and strengthen regulation and monitoring. It would ultimately help reduce air accidents and minimize loss of life. It is necessary for the government to take readiness to advance the bill for the mentioned purpose.

After Wednesday's accident, the government has formed a commission under the leadership of the former director general of the Civil Aviation Authority, Ratish Chandra Lal Suman, to investigate. But ICAO has said that an independent commission with expertise should be formed. The government is not paying attention to it. Instead, after the accident, a commission has been formed and weeds have been removed. This also shows that he does not want to follow the forced path of reform. As a result, the trend of accidents, suffering, formation of commissions, but no concrete initiative to improve the weaknesses of the air sector is repeating itself.

Wednesday's accident happened at the Tribhuvan Airport complex in Kathmandu. Earlier, in March 2018, a US-Bangla Airlines flight from Bangladesh to Nepal crashed inside the Tribhuvan airport. At that time, 51 passengers died. In March 2015, the airport was closed for four days when a Turkish Air plane skidded on the runway of Tribhuvan Airport. At other airports in the country too, details of aircraft skidding and causing minor or serious damage are frequently made public.

Buddha Air plane slipped at Bhairahawa Airport only on 28th of June. On January 1, 2079, Yeti's plane also met with an accident in Pokhara before reaching the airport during landing. References like these highlight the weaknesses in our airport security and rescue systems. And, it shows a serious need for reform. In order to reduce accidents that may occur in the airport or in the premises in the future, it is necessary to implement policy and management measures for improvement immediately.