← The Saudi aviation reference, in one place.
FAA Safety Briefing - Jan-Feb 2026
Reproduced for study. Always verify against the official GACAR at gaca.gov.sa.
January/February 2026 1
January/February 2026
GETTING TO
KNOW THE
6 Good Government
in Action9 A True ‘Pilot Project’ for
Aviation Safety24 Installing This Simple
Tool Can Save Lives
2 FAA Safety BriefingU.S. Department
of Transportation
Federal Aviation
Administration
ISSN: 1057-9648
FAA Safety BriefingJan/Feb 2026Volume 65/Number 1
Sean Duffy Secretary of Transportation
Bryan Bedford Administrator
Tina Amereihn Associate Administrator for Aviation Safety
Hugh Thomas Acting Executive Director, Flight Standards Service
Tom Hoffmann Editor
James Williams Associate Editor / Photo Editor
Rebekah Waters Associate Editor
Nicole Hartman Associate Editor
Paul Cianciolo Associate Editor / Social Media
Jamie Harvey Art Director
Published six times a year, FAA Safety Briefing, formerly
FAA Aviation News, promotes aviation safety by discussing current technical,
regulatory, and procedural aspects affecting the safe operation and maintenance of aircraft. Although based on current FAA policy and rule interpretations, all material is advisory or informational in nature and should not be construed to have regulatory effect. Certain details of accidents described herein may have been altered to protect the privacy of those involved.
The FAA does not officially endorse any goods, services, materials, or products of
manufacturers that may be referred to in an article. All brands, product names, company names, trademarks, and service marks are the properties of their respective owners. All rights reserved.
The Office of Management and Budget has approved the use
of public funds for printing FAA Safety Briefing.
bit.ly/m/FAASB
www.faa.gov/Safety_BriefingABOUT THIS ISSUE…
The January/February 2026 issue of
FAA Safety Briefing focuses on the
General Aviation Joint Safety Committee (GAJSC), highlighting their comprehensive and data-driven approach toward improving aviation safety
Contact Information
The magazine is available on the internet at:
www.faa.gov/safety_briefing
Comments or questions should be directed to the staff by:
• Emailing: SafetyBriefing@faa.gov
• Calling: (202) 267-1100
• Tweeting: @FAASafetyBrief
Subscription Information
The Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office sells FAA Safety Briefing on subscription and mails up to four renewal notices.
For New Orders:
Subscribe via the internet at https://bookstore.gpo.gov/products/faa-safety-briefing ,
telephone (202) 512-1800 or toll-free 1-866-512-1800, or use the self-mailer form in the center of this magazine and send to Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office, Washington, DC, 20402-9371.
Subscription Problems/Change of Address:
Send your mailing label with your comments/request to Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office, Contact Center, Washington, DC 20408-9375. You can also call (202) 512-1800 or 1-866-512-1800 and ask for Customer Service, or fax your information to (202) 512-2104.
January/February 2026 1The FAA Safety Policy Voice of Non-commercial General Aviation
6Good Government in Action
A Closer Look at the General Aviation Joint Safety Committee
by Robert Westover
9Loss of Control – Approach and LandingA True ‘Pilot Project’ for Aviation Safety
by Tom Hoffmann
13Loss of Control – Departure and Enroute
An Expanded Look at Loss of Control Accidents
by Tom Hoffmann
16 System Component Failure – Powerplant Enhancing Maintenance Safety Through Data-driven Collaboration
by Rebekah Waters
19 Controlled Flight into Terrain
The Route to Refining Recognition in the Air
by Nicole Hartman
22 System Component Failure – Non-Powerplant
Non-Powerplant Problem Prevention
by Nicole Hartman
24 Making Flying Safer With Angle of Attack Indicators Installing This Device Could Save Your Life
by Neil MansharamaniDEPARTMENTS
2 Jumpseat: an executive policy
perspective
3 ATIS: GA news and current events
5 Aeromedical Advisory: a checkup on
all things aeromedical
27 Checklist: FAA resources and
safety reminders
28 Drone Debrief: drone safety roundup
29 Nuts , Bolts, and Electrons:
GA maintenance issues
30 Vertically Speaking: safety issues for
rotorcraft pilots
31 Flight Forum: letters from the
Safety Briefing mailbag
32 O n Final: an editor's perspective
Inside back cover
FAA Faces: FAA employee profile
2 FAA Safety Briefing
JUMPSEATan executive policy perspective
HUGH THOMAS, ACTING FLIGHT STANDARDS SERVICE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
A COLLABORATIVE APPROACH TO GA SAFETY
I’ d like to begin this column with
some terrific safety news: we ended
fiscal year 2025 with the general
aviation fatal accident rate at 0.61
per 100,000 flight hours. That’s well
below the year’s annual 0.92 accident rate reduction goal and the accident
rates for our two best previous years:
0.71 in 2023 and 0.68 in 2024! While the 2024 and 2025 numbers are still
preliminary, we’re on track to have
yet another banner year in general
aviation safety. That’s an incredible
accomplishment and a direct reflec-tion of your commitment to safety
and professionalism.
I think it’s also safe to say that
the excellent work of the General Aviation Joint Safety Committee
(GAJSC) has been a key factor in
achieving this milestone. GAJSC
partners include experts from both government (e.g., FAA, NTSB,
NASA) and industry (e.g., AOPA,
EAA, GAMA) to ensure a broad
perspective on safety issues affecting
all facets of general aviation. It seems fitting that the GAJSC is the focus of
this issue, allowing us an opportunity
to familiarize you with the team’s comprehensive approach to improv -
ing aviation safety.
Core to its process is the use
of working groups that focus on the top accident causal factors for general aviation. The GAJSC relies
heavily on data when determining
focus areas for its working groups, regularly referring to this Pareto
chart ( bit.ly/GAParetoChart) to
inform its direction. To date, the GAJSC has convened five working
groups that have covered the fol-lowing areas: loss of control in two
parts (approach and landing, and
departure and enroute), system component failure (both powerplant
and non-powerplant related), and
controlled flight into terrain (CFIT).
Y ou can read more details about each of these working groups in this
issue, including their associated
safety enhancements.
These safety enhancements are at the
forefront of improving safety and have been the driving force behind many
initiatives you may now recognize, or
that have impacted how you fly. This includes streamlining the installation of
angle of attack indicators, advocating for
the more widespread implementation of real-time weather cameras, and creating
the National General Aviation Flight
Information Database (NGAFID), a tool
pilots can use to analyze their flight data.
The GAJSC has developed 46 safety enhancements to date, with several more
that will be introduced this fall.
We also offer a roadmap to the
GAJSC’s recently refreshed website at gajsc.org in our Checklist department.
The site has everything you need to
learn more about the GAJSC, includ-
ing reports, safety articles, videos, and more. Y ou can also sign up for a
quarterly newsletter, the FlySafe Flyer ,
at gajsc.org/newsletter to have the latest in GAJSC news sent straight to
your inbox.
As aviation technology and opera-
tions evolve, the GAJSC continues to adapt its focus to address emerging safety challenges. In fact, this winter,
the GAJSC’s Safety Analysis Team is
currently reviewing options for its
next working group — more to come
on that in the future. In the mean-time, we hope this issue provides
some insight into the GAJSC and
its ongoing commitment to general aviation safety.
Safe flying!
Members of the GAJSC during a recent meeting at AOPA headquarters in Frederick, Md.
AVIATION NEWS ROUNDUP
How Wildlife Strike Mitigation
Helps Ensure Safe Skies
Visual depictions of wildlife strikes
from the National Wildlife Strike
Database support trend analysis that
informs FAA mitigation guidance, which helps keep the flying public
safe and wildlife out of harm’s way. In
FAA usage, ‘wildlife’ refers to all wild
animals, not just birds, that may come
into contact with aircraft.
The modern approach to address-
ing wildlife strikes began in the 1990s when the FAA and U.S. Department of Agriculture partnered to system -
atically analyze and publish all strike data and co-author the first manual
for wildlife hazard management at
airports. The comprehensive strike report and manual established the
agencies as leaders in wildlife hazard
management and were used at air -
ports throughout North America, Europe, Africa, and South America.
Domestically, the FAA and USDA
established a National Wildlife Strike Database (wildlife.faa.gov) in 1994 to centralize data collection. Since then, it has received more than 300,000 strike submissions, including 22,372 in 2024.
Strike reporting is voluntary and
relies on the airport operators, pilots,
air traffic controllers, airline mechan-
ics, biologists, and other airport grounds personnel to provide incident
details. USDA scientists analyze and
filter the data to identify trends, which helps the FAA and airports identify
hazardous species and effective miti-
gation strategies.
The FAA has issued approximately
$400 million in Airport Improvement Program grants for mitigation projects,
including upgraded airfield perimeter
fencing, wildlife hazard assessments and plans, pyrotechnic launchers,
infrared cameras, and even canine
patrol programs.
Find out more about mitigation
strategies and the FAA ’s international influence regarding this challenge at
bit.ly/NoFowlPlay . Y ou can also read the
strike report at bit.ly/AirportWildlife .
Prime Integrator to Oversee Construction of Brand New Air
Traffic Control System Announced
The Department of Transportation
and Federal Aviation Administration
announced that Peraton will be the
Prime Integrator to oversee the rollout
of a brand-new air traffic control
system to enhance the safety and effi-ciency of our skies. Peraton’s capabilities are aligned
with President Trump’s goal to funda-
mentally overhaul air traffic control.
The company’s expertise in integrating
complex tech platforms and successful
collaboration with federal government agencies have positioned them well to
execute on this ambitious timeline.
Work will begin immediately
on initial priorities, which include transitioning the system’s remaining
copper infrastructure to modern
fiber and establishing a new digital
command center. Advancing other modernization initiatives, including
buying new radar systems and the
development of next-generation facilities, will also continue.
For more information, visit
bit.ly/BNATCS_Facts
FAA Kicks Off ‘Flight Path to
America’s 250th’ Campaign
In the video at faa.gov/America250,
FAA Administrator Bryan Bedford
extols our country’s aviation heritage
and invites aviation enthusiasts of all ages to join us on the Flight Path
to America’s 250th. Joining him is
Christopher Browne, director of the Smithsonian’s National Air and Space
Museum, as they kick off an inspiring
journey through past, present, and
future in American aviation.
The FAA ’s Flight Path to America’s
250th campaign is part of the
#FLYSAFE GA SAFETY ENHANCEMENT TOPICS
JANUARY
Risk Management
FEBRUARY
Multi-Engine Transition
Please visit bit.ly/FlySafeMedium for more information on these and other topics.
January/February 2026 3
ATISGA news and current events
A snapshot of the top 10 wildlife strike areas in the country
in 2024.
4 FAA Safety Briefing
ATIS GA news and current events
administration’s effort to recognize
the 250th anniversary of American
independence on July 4, 2026, and
celebrate our nation’s history.
Flight Path to America’s 250th
will spotlight aviation’s greatest milestones — and its exciting future.
From modernizing air traffic control
and improving pilot training to safely integrating drones, air taxis,
and even supersonic passenger jets,
the FAA has led the way in aviation
safety and innovation.
Along the Flight Path, aviation
historians will help highlight the arc of aviation progress. The campaign
will also take to the skies with visits to historic sites and museums across
the country. We’ll also spotlight the
FAA ’s ongoing role in driving safety
and enabling the innovations that are
shaping the future of flight and the people behind it all — the dedicated
FAA professionals who keep our skies
safe every day.
The American aviation system has
greatly evolved since the first National Aviation Day on Aug. 19, 1939, and
now encompasses global passenger
aviation and a community that is rede-fining the possibilities of future flight.
Given aviation’s enormous impact,
there are many ways
to celebrate. For
more information and to find out how
to get involved, visit
bit.ly/AmericaFP250 .
FAA’s Law Enforcement Assistance Program Protects Pilots from
Laser Threats
A single laser beam pointed skyward
can incapacitate a pilot and endanger
everyone onboard. In the Dallas-
Fort Worth area, repeated blue
laser strikes sparked a multi-agency
investigation led in part by FAA ’s Law Enforcement Assistance Program
(LEAP). Their expertise helped
track down and convict the offender, underscoring the critical role LEAP
plays in aviation safety.Each year,
thousands of pilots report
laser inci-
dents, and
LEAP agents respond by
providing
training,
outreach, and real-time support
to law enforcement. Their work
goes beyond lasers — advising on
drones, supporting investigations,
coordinating ramp inspections, and safeguarding major events. By
connecting aviation safety exper -
tise with law enforcement action,
LEAP ensures threats are quickly
addressed and our airspace remains
safe for everyone.
To further address this issue,
LEAP agents conducted targeted outreach in August, training and
collaborating with local, state, and
federal law enforcement to combat
laser strikes in areas with the highest
incident rates.
In 2025, pilots reported more
than 5,900 laser strikes and more
than 12,800 strikes in 2024. People
who shine lasers at aircraft face FAA fines of up to $32,646 per violation and
potential criminal charges.
For more information on LEAP’s
efforts and to watch a video, visit
bit.ly/4gnePbS.
Discontinuation of Selected
Charting Products
On Aug. 7, 2025, the FAA discontin-
ued the following products:
• VFR Class B Enhancement Graphics
• U.S. VFR Wall Planning
• U.S. IFR/VFR Low Altitude
Planning Charts.
The FAA will continue to publish
the Aeronautical Chart Users Guide,
however, revisions will be made on an
as-needed basis instead of the 56-day
charting schedule.
The final publication date for
these products was June 12, 2025. As they expire or become outdated, the
current versions of the products will be removed from the FAA website.
SMS Reminder for EASA Part 145
Repair Stations
All U.S.-registered Part 145 repair sta-
tions with a European Union Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) part 145 certi-
fication were required to implement a safety management system (SMS) by
Dec. 31, 2025. These repair stations
can comply by adopting and imple-
menting the FAA ’s SMS Voluntary
Program (SMSVP) as outlined in FAA Order 8900.1, Volume 17, Chapter 3,
Section 1 (bit.ly/8900v17ch3).
Get started by checking out FAA ’s
SMS webpage (bit.ly/faasms) for guidance documents and other helpful
information.
MOSAIC Advisory Circular Updates
The FAA ’s final rule, Modernization
of Special Airworthiness Certification
(MOSAIC), responds to evolving avi-
ation and airmen needs, providing for
future growth and innovation without compromising the safety of light-sport
category aircraft. MOSAIC increases the
availability of safe, modern, and afford-able aircraft for recreational aviation,
flight training, and certain aerial work.
Since the publication of MOSAIC,
the FAA has updated several advisory
circulars (ACs) to align with the final rule. Please review the following ACs:
• Certification of Repairmen (Light-Sport) AC 65-32B
(bit.ly/Repair_LightSport)
• Pilot Certification and Operations
for Sport Pilots, Flight Instructors
with a Sport Pilot Rating, and
Simplified Flight Controls AC
61-146 (bit.ly/MOSAIC_Cert_Ops)
• Certification: Pilots and Flight and
Ground Instructors AC 61-65K
(bit.ly/MOSAIC_PilotsInstructors)
Y ou can also review the MOSAIC
Fact Sheet to gain a better under -
standing of the changes at faa.gov/newsroom/fact_sheets.FAA Law Enforcement Assistance
Program helped Texas Department of Public Safety helicopter pilots locate an individual responsible for serial aircraft lasing in 2023.
January/February 2026 5
AEROMEDICAL ADVISORYa checkup on all things aeromedical
DR. SUSAN NORTHRUP , FAA FEDERAL AIR SURGEON
EXPEDITING YOUR MEDICAL
The AME Guide is the aviation
medical examiner's (AME) go-to
source for determining the disposi-
tion of medical conditions commonly
encountered during FAA medical cer -
tificate examinations as well as many
conditions that are rarely seen. It is a
living document that we update regu-
larly, sometimes monthly. On Aug. 27, 2025, we published an expanded list
of updates.
Even if you are not an AME (the
intended audience of the AME
Guide), if you have a medical con-dition that needs to be reported to
the FAA, looking at the disposition
tables is worthwhile and should help expedite the process. This includes
new conditions, changes in previ-
ously reported conditions and/or
treatment, and conditions for which
periodic testing is necessary, such as many cardiac conditions. We
strongly recommend that you review
any pertinent medical conditions
prior to beginning the examination.
Ideally, this is in consultation with your AME, although you can do
this on your own. Even if you have
medical expertise, you might not be aware of the aeromedical con-
cerns from a particular condition or
treatment.
Once you finalize your applica-
tion, it stays in the system for 60 days before being automatically deleted
unless an AME imports it. This
60-day period should give you enough time to obtain any necessary docu-
mentation or testing as outlined in the
AME Guide. We have also recently
modified the online application to
steer you to the correct sections that indicate what information is needed.
Keep in mind that once the AME
opens the examination using the numeric key you receive when you
complete the application, there is only
a 14-day window before it must be
transmitted to the FAA, regardless of
whether you have obtained all neces-sary information or not. If all the nec-
essary information is provided to the
FAA at the time of the application and
is favorable, the medical can be issued
quickly. However, if we need to reach out to you for additional information,
an average of 100 days is added to the
total processing time.
Many of the recent updates to the
guide were eye-related and addressed refractive surgery (such as LASIK),
cataract extraction and lens replace-
ment, and ocular infections. For color vision, we expanded the number of
frequently asked questions, revised
the flow chart, and adjusted the pub-lished passing threshold for the Rabin
Cone Contrast Test to match what we
began accepting in practice months
ago. We have received many ques-
tions on the new protocols and have provided clearer guidance.
We also reduced the requirements
for many conditions, including
cardiac disease follow-up, added
treatment options for diabetes, high cholesterol, weight loss, migraine
headaches, depression, psoriasis, and arthritis. We revised the guidance for several conditions for which a
CACI (Conditions AMEs Can Issue)
is authorized to better enable the
AME to issue a medical if criteria are met. For other conditions, we have
provided additional guidance to the
AME to better enable submission of
a complete package the first time. I
noted earlier that the processing time for the FAA to review a case increases
significantly if we need to request
information. Bear in mind that there are many disqualifying conditions for
which the AME can still directly issue
a medical certificate if the proper
documentation is provided at the time
of the examination or shortly thereaf-ter. Also, the AME can only hold the
medical for 14 days before they must
transmit it. It pays to do your home-work and be prepared just as you
would for a practical check ride.
Prepare for your medical at
faa.gov/ame_guide .
Dr. Susan Northrup received a bachelor’s degree in chem-
istry, a medical degree from The Ohio State University, and
a master’s degree in public health from the University of
Texas. She is double board-certified by the American Board of Preventive Medicine in Aerospace Medicine and Occupa-tional Medicine. She is a retired U.S. Air Force colonel and a
former regional medical director for Delta Air Lines. She is
also an active private pilot and aircraft owner.
6 FAA Safety Briefing
GOOD GOVERNMENT IN ACTIO N
A Closer Look at the
By Robert Hudson Westover
Good government is a term regularly bandied about.
It means many things to many people. But at its
core, and what it should mean to all of us, is that our
government should operate effectively and efficiently. One such example, and a gold standard of this principle of suc-
cessful government-in-action, is the General Aviation Joint Safety Committee (gajsc.org).
The GAJSC was created in 1997 in cooperation with the
FAA, Congress, and the White House’s Safer Skies initia-tive. Several years later, the DOT directed the FAA to work
with the general aviation (GA) community and industry to
revamp and refocus the GAJSC, aligning it with the data-
driven principles of the FAA ’s Commercial Aviation Safety
Team ( cast-safety.org).
The committee brings together government agen -
cies including NASA and the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) — as observers — along with
aviation industry experts from the GA community and
several associations, including the General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA), Experimental
Aircraft Association (EAA), and the Aircraft Owners and
Pilots Association (AOPA).
Together with these and other aviation-focused organi -
zations, the GAJSC promotes best practices and improved
safety tools and technologies for the GA component of the
two trillion-dollar aviation industry.
GAJSC leadership roles are shared between the FAA and
the aviation industry. The FAA co-chair with two industry co-chair positions held by AOPA and EAA.
Another vital component of the GAJSC is the Safety
Analysis Team (SAT). This sub-team of the GAJSC performs in-depth analysis of specific accident categories as well as
many important safety issues facing the GA industry. The
SAT uses project-specific working groups to conduct this
analysis and reports back to the GAJSC with mitigations for
prioritization and inclusion into a GA safety plan.
As a public-private partnership, the GAJSC works to
improve general aviation safety with the goal of reducing
As a public-private partnership,
the GAJSC works to improve general
aviation safety with the goal of
reducing the GA fatal accident rate.
The GAJSC in action during a recent quarterly meeting.
January/February 2026 7the GA fatal accident rate. Keeping our skies safe isn’t only
the right thing to do, it’s also hugely important for eco-
nomic confidence, as GA contributes $187 billion to GDP
and supports an estimated 1.3 million jobs.
Numbers tell the story, and since 1997, the number
of fatal accidents per year has fallen from nearly 400 to slightly below 200 as of 2024, when the latest figures were
available. And the good news continues as 2025 is on
course to have the lowest fatal accident rate since 1989. As of this writing, the GA fatal accident rate per 100K flight
hours for fiscal year 2025 was at 0.61, well below the year’s
accident rate reduction goal of 0.92.
Beneficial Safety Enhancements
Additionally, the GAJSC analyzes GA safety data to develop intervention strategies, called safety enhancements (SEs), to
prevent or mitigate problems associated with GA accidents
and identified risks. These SEs may include procedures,
training, best practices, and equipment installations that,
when implemented, may reduce the likelihood of accidents in the future. To see a full list of GAJSC SE topics, go to
gajsc.org/se.
“With the GAJSC, the FAA's Office of Accident
Investigation and Prevention (AVP) created a working
committee where we bring government and industry
together to look at data from different perspectives and
agree on an action plan, ” said Warren Randolph, a former
AVP deputy director who co-chaired GAJSC. He currently
serves as the chief data officer at NTSB. “ And, importantly, this cooperation is done in an environment where safety
information is shared and reviewed in confidence and
where multiple perspectives are brought to the table as no single organization has the answer — it’s a team sport. In
other words, the GAJSC creates trust-building in the spirit
of improved aviation safety. ”
EAA Vice President of Advocacy and Safety and current
GAJSC co-chair Sean Elliot notes there are multiple GAJSC successes to boast about. One that he recalls is the push for
the deployment of weather cameras (SE-12) in Hawaii and
the lower 48 states, based off the success seen in Alaska and Canada. “This technology provides real-time weather
information in remote airports and mountain passages. Pilots
having access to this information to inform their flight plan-ning is critical and has no doubt saved lives. ”
Further, continuing his emphasis on GAJSC’s practical side
of general aviation safety, Randolph feels very strongly that
Non-Required Safety Enhancing Equipment (NORSEE) (SE-
27), basically a streamlined process to get safety technologies on board smaller aircraft without the need of the somewhat The GAJSC team during a recent quarterly meeting in Washington, D.C.
The GAJSC brings together
government agencies along
with aviation industry experts
from the GA community and
several associations.
GAJSC Industry Co-chairs Mike Ginter (AOPA) and Sean Elliott (EAA) (far left and right) with
GAJSC SAT Co-chairs Jens Hennig (GAMA) and Corey Stephens (FAA) (center left and right).
8 FAA Safety Briefingbureaucratic and costly certification process, has fast-tracked
many crucial lifesaving tools for pilots. Randolph empha-
sized that common-sense safety issues are not overlooked.
“NORSEE is about efficacy, not recklessness. ”
Corey Stephens, an FAA operations research analyst who
co-leads the GAJSC Safety Analysis Team added, “NORSEE is an excellent example of government, in coordination
with industry, removing barriers to getting safety-en-
hancing equipment on the aircraft without requiring it by regulation. The FAA ensures that the benefits of installing
the equipment outweigh any potential risks. ”
Safety Enhancements are Helping Pilots Fly Again
Among the many beneficial tools available to pilots and avia-
tion instructors is getting pilots who have not flown for long
periods of time back into the sky safely. From time to time,
many pilots have had to take a break from flying. One of
the first steps back is to work with an instructor to sharpen
those flying skills back to a functional state. That’s why SE-08 covers the topic of Flight Training After a Period of Inactivity.
Another critical topic in this arena is SE-21, Risk-based
Flight Review. SE-21 is complemented by an FAA resource,
Conducting an Effective Flight Review, developed by a
GAJSC collaborative team. This subject fits hand in glove with SE-08, in that the flight review should be tailored to
the pilot, and this is especially critical when the pilot has
been away from flying for a while. In such cases, a simple
flight review may not be sufficient to address the risks
involved. Flight instructors should work with their students so they understand why. Setting clear expectations early in
the process can help avoid problems later.
Transitioning to New Aircraft
The reality is that change can introduce risk, for instance
when a pilot flies an unfamiliar aircraft or begins using
unfamiliar equipment. That is why the GAJSC has
SE-05, Transition Training . This SE offers web-based
tools to help pilots prepare for training and instruc-tors design a proper training plan to ensure pilots are ready for their new aircraft. The GAJSC’s input is also
encapsulated in Advisory Circular 90-109A, Transition
to Unfamiliar Aircraft, which provides best practices for
pilots and instructors.
Additionally, SE-07, Utilization of Type Clubs, is a crucial
resource for pilots transitioning to a new aircraft. Type
clubs are great hubs for aircraft-specific information. From
maintenance recommendations to flying tips, there’s no need to reinvent the wheel when organizations like type
clubs have already done the work. Any instructor who flies
extensively in a specific aircraft type would be wise to get involved with a type club.
A Mission Without End
GA encompasses more than 275,000 diverse aircraft, including propeller-driven airplanes, amateur-built air -
craft, helicopters, balloons, and highly sophisticated jets.
GAJSC’s work with private industry
has and will continue to improve GA
safety. More information about the purpose, objectives, and composition of
the committee, and a full list of SEs, is
available on the GAJSC website.
“The committee structure is in
GAJSC’s name. It’s a joint committee that brings together aviation profes-
sionals from varied backgrounds, ”
said Randolph. “I think the American people greatly appreciate hearing about
the collaborative nature of this com-
mittee, which is a true gold standard in good governance and how it makes
flying safer. ”
Robert Hudson Westover is a safety promotion specialist with
the FAA Office of Accident Investigation and Prevention.The GAJSC team is often on hand at events like EAA AirVenture to answer questions and
promote its ongoing work.
January/February 2026 9
WORKING GROUP I
Loss of Control — Approach and Landing
A True ‘Pilot Project’ for Aviation Safety
By Tom Hoffmann
Editor’s note: The following five features are part of a series of articles that profile the GAJSC’s comprehensive working group process for analyzing accident
data and developing effective safety intervention strategies.
One of the very first orders of business after the 2011
reboot of the General Aviation Joint Safety Committee
(GAJSC) was the formation of a working group to
analyze accidents in what was (and still is) the highest risk area for general aviation — inflight loss of control (LOC-I).
This inaugural working group was fashioned in line with the GAJSC’s revised structure to provide proactive and
cooperative safety analysis to reduce the fatal accident rate
in general aviation. Its ultimate goal was to establish a set of safety mitigation strategies, or safety enhancements (SEs),
that when implemented, would help reduce risk in this
accident category.
The initial focus on LOC-I was driven by an overview
the GAJSC conducted of fatal accidents that occurred between 2001 and 2010. From this review, the GAJSC
developed a GA fatal accident Pareto chart to more easily
identify areas of risk and guide its work. The data indi-cated that 40.2% of the accidents were caused by LOC-I,
which made it a clear priority. Given the large dataset
for this accident category, the GAJSC further refined its
LOC-I focus to the approach and landing phase of flight,
with a follow-on working group to study the remaining enroute and departure accidents.
Participants and Leadership
This first working group began by assembling a team of about 25 government and industry subject matter experts
(SMEs) to analyze accident data and perform a root
cause analysis of why LOC-I was so deadly. Membership
spanned several offices within the FAA as well as many
key aviation industry stakeholders, including AOPA, The GAJSC's fatal accident Pareto chart helps identify areas of risk and guide its work.
EAA, GAMA, Hawker Beechcraft (now Textron), and
more (see Appendix 2 of the LOC-I working group final
report for the full membership list). Members of the
GAJSC’s Safety Analysis Team (SAT) were also on hand
to assist with data analysis, technical support, and overall
process guidance.
Two co-chairs were chosen to lead the team: Kevin
Clover from the FAA ’s General Aviation and Commercial Division and David Oord from EAA. The LOC-I working group was divided into three sub-teams based on the
accident selection subsets of experimental amateur-built,
certificated piston-engine airplanes, and turbine-en-
gine-powered airplanes. During its tenure, the team lever -
aged the expertise within its ranks and from external SMEs
to provide technical briefings that would help educate and
inform decision-making on potential safety mitigations.
Timeframe
The GAJSC approved the charter and formation of the
LOC-I working group on April 26, 2011. The team kicked
off its first of seven multi-day meetings in September 2011
at the Aircraft Electronics Association’s headquarters in
Kansas City, Missouri. It wrapped up work in September
2012, advancing 23 SEs for approval.
Methodology and Outcomes
As the pilot project for the GAJSC’s new approach to improving GA safety, the working group sought to adopt
a structured, six-step strategic process that would make its
work data-driven and ensure greater analytical credibility.
10 FAA Safety BriefingThe first step involved reviewing and analyzing a set of
279 LOC approach and landing accidents (from 2001 to
2010) provided by the GAJSC’s Safety Analysis Team (SAT)
and the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB).
Next, the working group reviewed previous work done in
this area to determine its applicability. This included the Flight Safety Foundation’s Approach and Landing Accident
Reduction (ALAR) toolkit. As noted earlier, the team also
received briefings from SMEs on various topics, such as angle of attack indicators and upset recovery training.
With step three began the process of developing and
prioritizing safety intervention strategies that would
reduce the potential risk for approach and landing LOC-I
accidents. This in-depth process first involved evaluating the event sequencing for each of the accidents studied. If
the event was considered contributory to the accident, a
problem statement was developed along with potential interventions that could mitigate the risk.
“This was a difficult part of the process at times due to
the lack of investigative accident data, ” said working group
co-chair Kevin Clover. While it may be easy to draw conclu-
sions with limited details, Clover stated that the team was determined to ask the right questions on root causes and
seek solutions that would truly help prevent a recurrence.
The team then used a rating system for each proposed
intervention to determine an overall effectiveness score.
This took into account the degree to which the problem contributed to the accident and how the intervention could
have resolved it, the team’s confidence in the performance
of the intervention, and applicability.
The interventions were further bucketed into common
themes or concentration areas (e.g., training, policy, tech-nology, etc.) and assigned a feasibility score. Feasibility
scoring considered factors such as technology constraints,
cost, and whether regulation or guidance changes would be necessary. Using both the effectiveness and feasibility
scores, the team was able to tabulate, sort, and prioritize
project areas and their associated interventions.
In step four, each of the three sub-teams organized
interventions in their respective areas and developed SEs This inaugural working group was
fashioned in line with the GAJSC’s
revised structure to provide
proactive and cooperative safety
analysis to reduce the fatal accident
rate in general aviation.
January/February 2026 11
and specific plans of action to mitigate or prevent acci-
dent-causing problems. A total of 28 SEs were presented to
the GAJSC, with 23 receiving final approval. See Figure 1
for a list of the 23 approved SEs.
The working group then set out with step five to develop
a detailed implementation plan for each approved interven-tion. Each plan needed to contain:
• prioritized implementation strategies;
• parties responsible for action;
• major implementation milestones;
• metrics to monitor progress in meeting these milestones; and
• metrics for tracking the success of the interventions.
As part of this process, a statement of work was devel-
oped for each SE, providing a brief and clear description of the project’s objective, approach, and outcome(s). Y ou
can find more details on each SE implementation plan in
Appendix 8 of the LOC-I working group report.
SE Success Stories
With an action plan in place, the group’s hard work towards driving down the LOC-I accident rate soon
began to bear fruit. One leading example was SE-1 and
SE-2 efforts to advance an awareness campaign on the
benefits of angle of attack indicators (AoA). Working
with the Part 23 Aviation Rulemaking Committee, which was formed to recommend changes to airworthiness
standards for small airplanes, the GAJSC was able to
emphasize the importance of non-required AoA to the pilot community. This advocacy lent support to a revised
FAA policy in 2014 that streamlined certification and
installation of non-required AoA indicators to make
them more accessible and affordable.
Results from an early study indicated that GA aircraft
equipped with AoA experienced greater pitch reductions
during the turn-to-final portion of the approach — a
crucial indicator of a stable approach. Subsequent research
using much larger and longer-term data has continued to
demonstrate this same pitch-reduction relationship.
Other success stories from this initial working group
include improved awareness of how sedating medications can
adversely affect flight safety (SE-15) and advocating for the
expanded use of real-time weather cameras to reduce the risk
of weather-related accidents (SE-12). On the latter, the FAA ’s Weather Camera Program now owns and maintains over 260
camera systems in Alaska, Hawaii, and the contiguous U.S.,
along with hosting camera images from over 530 non-FAA-
owned weather camera sites at weathercams.faa.gov. Weather
camera deployment had already occurred prior to the work of the GAJSC, but the GAJSC’s LOC-I recommendations helped
bring this safety-enhancing technology to Hawaii and the
CONUS. Data generated by the Alaska weather program has
concluded that the implementation of the weather camera
service across Alaska resulted in an 85% reduction in weath-er-related accidents and a 69% reduction in weather-related
flight interruptions from 2007 to 2014.
Final Steps
These and the other SEs developed by the LOC-I working
group continue to pay dividends more than a decade later. Data indicated that 40.2% of the
accidents were caused by LOC-I,
which made it a clear priority.
The team’s initial work also provided a critical blueprint for
future working groups to follow and learn from. This was
captured in the sixth and final step of the working group,
which was to provide feedback to the GAJSC on what did
and did not work throughout the process.
Lessons learned from the accident analysis, accident
selection, and establishment of the work group included the need for a formalized membership process, approval of
the methodology for narrowing down the volume of acci-dents, and ensuring the appropriate size of a work group. A
joint meeting was held between the LOC-I working group
and the SAT in January 2012 to summarize the lessons
learned in preparation for future work.
“The first working group was going to be a test case as
we were planning to use the same process we developed with the Commercial Aviation Safety Team (CAST) for
the Part 121 air carrier community, ” said FAA operations research analyst and GAJSC SAT co-chair Corey Stephens.
“The team had to tailor their mitigations to the broad spec-
trum of general aviation, but they did a tremendous job. As
a result of the team’s knowledge, experience, and enthusi-
asm, we were able to develop a set of solid risk mitigations to begin battling the largest killer in general aviation,
inflight loss of control. ”
Tom Hoffmann is the editor of FAA Safety Briefing. He is a commercial pilot and holds an
A&P certificate.
LEARN MORE
GAJSC Loss of Control Working Group — Landing and Approach Final Report
gajsc.org/docs Figure 1. A list of the 23 approved safety enhancements from the
Loss of Control Working Group — Approach and Landing.
Safety
Enhancement Title
SE-1 Angle of Attack (AoA) Systems — New & Current Production
SE-2 Angle of Attack (AoA) — Existing GA Fleet
SE-3 Aeronautical Decision Making
SE-4 Over Reliance on Automation
SE-5 Transition Training
SE-6 Transition Training — Letter of Deviation Authority for
Experimental/Amateur-Built Aircraft
SE-7 Utilization of Type Clubs
SE-8 Flight Training After Period of Flight Inactivity
SE-9 Part 135 Safety Culture
SE-10 Stabilized Approach and Landing
SE-12 Remote Airfield Weather Cameras
SE-13 Weather Technologies
SE-14 Engine Monitoring Technology
SE-15 Flight After Use of Medications with Sedating Effect
SE-16 Flight with Impairing or Incapacitating Medical Conditions — Improve Medical Records
SE-17 Flight with Impairing or Incapacitating Medical Conditions — Barriers
to Communication
SE-21 Risk-Based Flight Review
SE-22 Flight Data Monitoring
SE-23 EAB/Flight Test
SE-24 Single-Pilot CRM
SE-25 Reduce Regulatory Roadblocks — Streamline Novel Technology
SE-26 Reduce Regulatory Roadblocks — Part 23 Aviation Rulemaking Committee
SE-27 Reduce Regulatory Roadblocks — Review of 14 CFR Section 21.8 and 21.9
12 FAA Safety Briefing
January/February 2026 13
WORKING GROUP II
Loss of Control — Departure and Enroute
An Expanded Look at Loss of Control Accidents
By Tom Hoffmann
With the success of the General Aviation Joint Safety
Committee’s (GAJSC) inaugural working group to
analyze inflight loss of control (LOC-I) accidents,
the GAJSC continued its focus in the LOC category of accidents with a second team soon after. Expanding on
the initial work on approach and landing accidents, this “LOC-I 2.0” working group was tasked with reviewing
accidents during the departure and enroute phases of flight.
Similar to its predecessor, the new LOC-I group's goal was to establish a set of safety mitigation strategies, or safety
enhancements (SEs), that, when implemented, would help
reduce risk in this accident category.
As mentioned in the LOC-I working group for approach
and landing feature, the GAJSC’s initial focus on LOC-I was driven by a review of fatal accidents that occurred
between 2001 and 2010. Loss of control was by far the
leading causal factor at 40.2%. Given the large dataset for this accident category, the GAJSC decided to split its LOC-I
focus into two separate areas.
Participants and Leadership
This second LOC-I working group began by assembling a
team of about 25 government and industry subject matter
experts (SMEs), many of whom also served on the first
LOC-I working group. Membership spanned several offices
within the FAA as well as many key aviation industry and community stakeholders, including AOPA, EAA, GAMA,
Garmin, the Society of Aviation Flight Educators, and more (see Appendix 5 of the Loss of Control Working Group —
Departure and Enroute final report for the full membership
list). Members of the GAJSC’s Safety Analysis Team (SAT) were also on hand to assist with data analysis, technical
support, and overall process guidance.
The co-chairs from the initial LOC-I working group
remained in place to lead the team: Kevin Clover from
the FAA ’s General Aviation and Commercial Division and
David Oord, who was now with AOPA. Unlike the initial
LOC-I working group, which was divided into three teams based on aircraft certification subsets, this team was split
into two sub-groups without regard to specific subject
matter expertise. This was a takeaway from the previous Expanding on the initial work on
approach and landing accidents,
this “LOC-I 2.0” working group was
tasked with reviewing accidents
during the departure and enroute
phases of flight.
14 FAA Safety Briefing
team, which determined that accident causal factors were
not specific to aircraft certification.
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) also
assisted the team by providing information about the event
sequence and docket information involved with each of the
accidents studied.
Timeframe
The GAJSC approved the charter and formation of the second LOC-I working group on Sep. 1, 2012. The
team kicked off its first of seven multi-day meetings in
September 2012 at the Aircraft Electronics Association’s
headquarters in Kansas City, Missouri. It wrapped up work
in the fall of 2013, advancing six new SEs and four new outputs of existing SEs for approval.
Methodology and Outcomes
Based on the success of the pilot project to study LOC-I accidents, the working group sought to retain the same
six-step strategic process with a few important adjustments
based on lessons learned.
The first step involved reviewing and analyzing a set of
120 LOC-I departure and enroute accidents (from 2001 to 2010) provided by the GAJSC’s SAT. This list was pared
down to the first 90 well-documented cases, which were
then split between the two sub-groups. Next, the working group reviewed previous work done regarding LOC-I to
determine its applicability. The team also received briefings
from SMEs on various topics, such as angle of attack indi-
cators and envelope protection systems.
With step three began the process of developing and
prioritizing safety intervention strategies that would
reduce the potential for departure and enroute LOC-I
accidents. This in-depth process first involved evaluating
the event sequencing for each of the accidents studied. If
the event was considered contributory to the accident, a
problem statement was developed along with potential interventions that could mitigate the risk. Those inter -
ventions were then prioritized and scored based on their effectiveness and feasibility.
The working group did notice that many of the interven-
tions that rose to the top were the same as those from the first LOC working group. No further action was taken on
these interventions, but their discovery strengthened the
prior analysis and action taken.
In step four, the team organized and presented their
interventions to the GAJSC. Six of the SEs received final approval, along with four additional outputs for existing SEs. See Figure 1 for a full list.
With step five, the working group took a slightly differ -
ent direction based on previous feedback. Instead of devel-
oping detailed implementation plans for each approved
intervention category, which sometimes contained multiple SEs and were difficult to create and track, they focused
squarely on SE development. To improve tracking and
communication effectiveness, the team revised the SE tem-
plate to include the following elements:
1. Summary
2. Statement of Work
3. Outputs
4. Actions
5. Additional Resources
6. Relationship to Current Aviation Community
Initiatives
7. Implementation Order
Appendix 12 of the working group’s final report provides
more details on each SE’s implementation plan.Included among the newly
developed SEs was a focus on
pilot response to unexpected
events, safety culture, and the
FAA’s transition to the new
Airman Certification Standards.
SE Success Stories
Included among the newly developed SEs was a focus
on pilot response to unexpected events, safety culture,
and the FAA ’s transition to the new Airman Certification
Standards. SE-30 also led to the development of the FAA ’s
new over-the-counter (OTC) medication reference guide,
What OTC Medications Can I Take and Still Be Safe to Fly? at bit.ly/OTCMedstoFly . The need for increased focus
and clarity on safe medication use came straight from the GAJSC’s fatal accident analysis.
In addition to the new SEs, the second LOC-I working
group also developed four more outputs for existing SEs on transition training, aerospace medicine education, and
exploring new technologies that would advance safety.
Final Steps
These new intervention strategies, coupled with those
developed by the initial LOC-I working group, have
served the GA community well by ushering in new edu-
cational tools, advocating for policy changes, and raising
awareness of several key safety issues. The team’s work
also helped further refine the process for the GAJSC with a few notable lessons learned. These were captured in
the sixth and final step of the working group. Among the
suggestions: don’t segment by aircraft type or phase of flight during the analysis phase, emphasize the creation
of SEs over the more difficult tracking of detailed imple-
mentation plans, and recruit new members to get fresh
ideas and perspectives. The “LOC-I 2.0” working group
held a meeting with the GAJSC SAT in December 2013 to summarize the lessons learned.
“The first LOC working group was a proof-of-concept
project that helped inform future work, ” said Jens Hennig, GAMA vice president of operations, safety, and security and GAJSC SAT co-chair. “LOC 2.0 helped boost and rein-force that the conclusions and focus areas identified in the first work activity were correct, but also helped tailor and
refine several of the initial safety enhancements produced. ”
With these process improvements in place, the GAJSC was
well-positioned to continue with future working groups and reduce risk in other general aviation accident categories.
Tom Hoffmann is the editor of FAA Safety Briefing. He is a commercial pilot and holds an
A&P certificate. Figure 1. A list of six approved safety enhancements from the
Loss of Control Working Group II — Departure and Enroute,
along with four new outputs for previous SEs.
Safety
Enhancement Title
SE-28 Pilot Response to Unexpected Events
SE-30 Medications List for Pilots
SE-31 Test Pilot Utilization and Experimental/Amateur-Built Proficiency
SE-32 Airman Certification Standards
SE-33 Safety Culture
SE-34 Outreach
SE-5 Transition Training — New Output 4
SE-15 Flight After Use of Medications with Sedating Effects, New
Output 5
SE-25 New Safety Technologies — New Output 2
SE-25 New Safety Technologies — New Output 3
LEARN MORE
GAJSC Loss of Control Working Group — Enroute and Departure Final Report
gajsc.org/docs
January/February 2026 15
16 FAA Safety Briefing
WORKING GROUP III
System Component
Failure — Powerplant
Enhancing Maintenance Safety
through Data-driven Collaboration
By Rebekah Waters
After their work on inflight loss of control (LOC-I),
the GAJSC turned its attention to powerplant-related
system component failures. An FAA study found
that this category was the third-highest category of fatal accidents from 2001 to 2010. As with the first two working
groups, data-driven strategies drove the decision to form the third working group, which was tasked with addressing
this critical issue impacting GA safety.
The working group focused on fatal accidents involving
operations under 14 CFR parts 91 (GA ops), 125 (large aircraft), 135 (on-demand ops), and 137 (aerial appli-
cation ops) and operations categorized as “public use”
or “unknown. ” The GAJSC charged the working group
with conducting a detailed review of powerplant-related fatal accidents and recommending actionable safety
interventions.
Participants and Leadership
The group was co-chaired by representatives from the
FAA and GAMA, with technical support and process
guidance from the FAA ’s Office of Accident Investigation
and Prevention. Membership included government and
industry powerplant subject matter experts (SMEs) who
provided technical expertise to the project. (See Appendix B in the report for a full list of members.)Timeframe
The system component failure - powerplant work group began its work in early 2014, and its charter was approved
at the April 24, 2014, GAJSC meeting. The members set to
work systematically reviewing accident data and shaping
interventions that could directly reduce future accident
risk. They met eight times between January 2014 and January 2015.
Methodology and Outcome
The process began with accident selection. Out of 282 related accidents that occurred from 2001 to 2010, the
Safety Analysis Team (SAT) identified 70 representative
accidents for detailed review. These were supported by
National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) dockets
that provided additional technical, medical, and pilot information.The accomplishments of the GAJSC’s
third working group underscore the
power of data-driven collaboration
in advancing general aviation safety.
The team supplemented its review with technical
briefings on subjects including predictive maintenance,
the FAA ’s Monitor Safety/Analyze Data (MSAD) program,
Service Difficulty Reporting (SDR) system, human factors,
and emerging technologies such as smart co-pilot systems.
This expertise helped them develop and prioritize safety intervention strategies that aimed to reduce the potential
future occurrences of powerplant failure accidents.
These prospective interventions, or safety enhance-
ments (SEs), were presented to the GAJSC for review and approval. Each SE included specific implementation strat-
egies, responsible parties, milestones, and metrics for both
progress and outcome measurement. Approved SEs were
advanced to the GAJSC for adoption, while others were reserved for future consideration.
The efforts resulted in the adoption of 10 SEs in October
2015, each targeting a specific risk factor identified in the dataset. Other SEs were reserved for future implementa-
tion. One of the reserved SEs, SE-42, was subsequently
adopted in January 2018.
SE Highlights
Among the adopted SEs, a couple stand out. One success story is SE-39, Smart Cockpit Technology , which led to the
development of MITRE’s digital copilot. MITRE's design functions as a cognitive assistant that simulates the support
of a human co-pilot for single-pilot general aviation flights.
Operating on a mobile device, the system uses algorithms to anticipate and deliver the right information — like runway
data, frequencies, checklists, weather changes, or proximity
alerts — via voice or timely notifications, reducing pilot workload and minimizing cockpit distractions. It could inte-
grate seamlessly with existing tools like electronic flight bags,
without requiring hardware installation or FAA approval.
While MITRE’s design is still a prototype, smart cockpit
technologies are being rolled out, with two listed on the GAJSC’s website under SE-39.
A rigorous safety analysis, published in May 2020, used
cognitive performance analysis, human reliability methods, and probabilistic risk assessment to model accident rates
with and without the digital copilot. Results indicated
the system could significantly reduce both total and fatal accident rates in general aviation. In recognition of its innovation and potential impact, MITRE received one of the most prestigious accolades in science and engineer -
ing — it was named a 2017 R&D 100 Award Winner and
also earned an Editor’s Choice distinction at the awards
ceremony held in Orlando, Florida, on Nov. 17, 2017.
SE-42, Mitigating V -b and Clamp Failures , is another
standout success story. The team conducted an in-depth
study of the turbocharger–tailpipe interface on turbo-
charged, reciprocating-engine aircraft. They also reviewed
an FAA report, “Exhaust System Turbocharger to Tailpipe
V-band Coupling/Clamp Working Group Final Report, ”
that identified a clear root cause: spot -welded, multi -seg-
ment V-band couplings are prone to fatigue cracking and
eventual separation — leading to potentially catastrophic
exhaust fires and engine failures. Based on these findings,
the group issued tailored recommendations:
• Life limits for coupling types at 500 hours for spot-
welded and 2,000 hours for riveted or one-piece designs.
• Annual or periodic inspections and appropriate training in inspect/install practices for maintenance staff.
• For new designs, mandating the inclusion of these life limits in the airworthiness limitations section of mainte-
nance manuals.
The FAA published these guidelines via a Special
Airworthiness Information Bulletin, SAIB CE -18-21, in
July 2018, making the best practices guide publicly avail-
able and encouraging adoption while also highlighting the
unsafe condition that had been identified. By establishing
defined service life limits and mandatory inspection inter -
vals, SE -42 created a structured maintenance framework
to preemptively remove at-risk V-band couplings before they fail. The dissemination of best practices enhanced
mechanics' and operators' awareness of proper coupling
inspection and installation techniques, especially of spot-
welded seam conditions. The 2018 report
on V-band clamps and SE-42 identified the underlying issues. The FAA, through further
analysis, later released a fleet-wide airworthi-
ness directive issued in July 2023, which institutionalized these same
life limits and inspection require-
ments across affected aircraft.
January/February 2026 17MITRE's design for a digital copilot
functions as a cognitive assistant
that simulates the support of a
human co-pilot for single-pilot
general aviation flights.
Recognizing that not all powerplant failures are fatal,
SE-41, Crashworthiness and Survivability , focused on
increasing pilot and passenger survival through mea-
sures like improved restraints, crashworthy fittings, and
survival training. The group analyzed accident data
to identify common injury mechanisms and areas for improvement in aircraft design and occupant protec-
tion. Many of the fatalities reviewed could have been
prevented with better survivability tools. Many manu-facturers have adopted the guidelines set forth in SE-41,
leading to safer aircraft designs. The general aviation
community continues to benefit from the ongoing
efforts to monitor and improve safety.
The accomplishments of the GAJSC’s third working
group underscore the power of data-driven collaboration in
advancing general aviation safety. By meticulously analyzing
accident causes and developing targeted safety enhance-
ments like SE -39, SE -41, and SE -42, the group has not only
identified critical risk factors but also delivered practical,
implementable solutions that have demonstrably reduced
accidents and improved survivability. These successes reflect
the ongoing commitment of the GAJSC to making general
aviation safer for pilots and passengers alike. As technology evolves and new challenges emerge, the foundation laid by this working group ensures that safety remains at the fore -
front, guiding future innovations and regulatory actions.
Rebekah Waters is an FAA Safety Briefing associate editor. She is a technical writer-editor in
the FAA’s Flight Standards Service. Figure 1. A list of the 11 approved safety enhancements from the
System Component Failure - Powerplant Working Group.
Safety
Enhancement Title
SE-35 Mitigating the Risk of Improper Torquing
SE-36 Vmc Scenario Training
SE-37 Multi-engine Emergency Management Technology
SE-39 Smart Cockpit Technology
SE-41 Accident Survivability
SE-42 Mitigating V-band Clamp Failures
SE-44 Modernized Maintenance Safety Reporting System
SE-45 Maintenance Placard
SE-47 A&P Education and Training
SE-48 Ignition Systems
SE-49 SCF-PP Outreach
LEARN MORE
GAJSC System Component Failure — Powerplant Final Report
gajsc.org/docs
18 FAA Safety BriefingMany of the fatalities reviewed
could have been prevented with
better survivability tools.
January/February 2026 19
WORKING GROUP IV
Controlled Flight Into Terrain
The Route to Refining Recognition in the Air
By Nicole Hartman
According to FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 61-134,
General Aviation CFIT Awareness, controlled flight
into terrain (CFIT) occurs when an airworthy aircraft
under the control of a qualified pilot is flown into terrain (water or obstacles) due to the pilot’s inadequate awareness
of the impending collision. Note the qualifiers — airworthy aircraft, qualified pilot, pilot’s lack of awareness. A mechan-
ical failure in flight, a pilot’s loss of control, or intentional
CFIT would not be categorized as CFIT.
The General Aviation Joint Safety Committee (GAJSC)
previously established a safety analysis team to review CFIT accidents in 2000. The results of this analysis focused on
equipping GA airplanes with, and the use of, terrain aware -
ness systems and GPS, as well as emphasizing pilot training.
Although the overall trend for CFIT events was encouraging,
and accidents were in a steady decline, CFIT continued to be
a high-risk area. So, in 2018, the GAJSC chartered the CFIT working group to develop data-driven recommendations, or
safety enhancements (SEs), to mitigate the risk of fatal CFIT
accidents. Confronted with a 35-day federal government
shutdown the team faced unique challenges, but it remained
focused and dedicated to the important work.
Participants and Leadership
Comprised of about 40 government and industry subject matter experts, the team was co-chaired by Kate Fraser from the General Aviation Manufacturers Association
(GAMA) and Frank Stadmeyer from the FAA ’s Office
of Accident Investigation and Prevention Service. All
participating organizations in the GAJSC had an oppor -
tunity to nominate technical experts based on expertise
identified in the working group charter. Participants
included representatives from AOPA, Honeywell, EAA,
GAMA, Textron, Continental Motors, and Lycoming Engines (see Appendix 2 of the final report for the full
membership list).
Timeframe
The team held its first meeting in October 2017 at NetJets’
headquarters in Columbus, Ohio. The subsequent nine
meetings were held across the country over two and a half
years, ending in May of 2019. The working group’s final
report was then published in June 2021. The GAJSC chartered the CFIT
working group to develop data-
driven recommendations, or safety
enhancements SEs, to mitigate the
risk of fatal CFIT accidents.
20 FAA Safety Briefing
Methodology and Outcomes
The team conducted its detailed accident analyses through
two subgroups based on the accident selection subsets
of experimental amateur-built, certificated piston engine
aircraft, and turbine engine-powered aircraft.
The set of 67 accident reports was split for analysis with
spreadsheets that included the accident event sequences necessary to help understand the contributing factors in
each accident. Similar to previous working group proce-
dures the subgroups then evaluated the events to deter -
mine if they represented a “problem” involving hardware/
software failure or human execution errors, decisions, or
procedural non-compliance.
If the members considered an event contributory to the acci-
dent, they decided on a problem statement, along with poten -
tial interventions that could have precipitated the problem.
Next steps included prioritizing and scoring each interven-
tion’s effectiveness and feasibility. The high-priority project areas were reassigned to the subgroups, and the first task was
to organize the interventions in their respective buckets into
SEs (an SE is a plan containing one or more intervention strategies to prevent or mitigate a problem associated with an
accident’s cause). See the CFIT Working Group Final report
for more details on this step of the process.
The team originally drafted 12 SEs, but after discussions
with the GAJSC and the Safety Analysis Team (SAT), seven SEs were submitted for final consideration.
SE Success Stories
The SEs addressed CFIT mitigation strategies from different perspectives, including training and education,
policy, and technology. There is also a large human factors component that addresses external pressure to continue a flight. These more insidious factors can have a huge impact
on your decisions (or indecisions) during flight. Some of these influences include:
• Plan Continuation Bias (Get-There-Itis) — A significant factor where pilots continue with a plan despite red flags,
often due to pressure to complete a flight, leading to
negative decisions.
• Unintended Instrument Meteorological Conditions (UIMC) into IMC — Continued VFR flight into IMC was
identified as the deadliest CFIT precursor, with a high
fatality rate.
• Wire Strikes — These accidents often occur below 200
feet above ground level, highlighting the importance of
flying at higher altitudes.
• Automation Overreliance — While technology has
reduced CFIT, overreliance on automation can reduce pilot proficiency and situational awareness.
The approved SEs include:
SE 12 R1, Expanded Weather Camera Network
The working group added an output to this safety
enhancement that investigates and deploys cost-effective technologies that can provide real-time weather information
(including actual conditions as viewed through a remote
camera) at airports, similar to what is being done in other parts of the United States, such as Alaska, and Canada.
The team originally drafted 12 SEs,
but after discussions with the
GAJSC and the Safety Analysis Team
(SAT), seven SEs were submitted
for final consideration.
The CFIT Working Group during a meeting in Boston.
January/February 2026 21SE 51, Augmented Visual Technology for GA
Encourage GA pilots and operators to equip and utilize
enhanced vision system and /or synthetic vision system
technology to enhance situational awareness of the sur -
rounding terrain.
SE 52, WINGS Program Overhaul
The FAA to overhaul and develop a plan for continual
improvement of its WINGS Pilot Proficiency Program to make it more user-friendly and dynamic. Aspects of the
current WINGS program’s automation are not user-friendly,
especially for tablet and smartphone users. To encourage
greater use of the program and reach more pilots, the CFIT
working group recommends refreshing the program’s auto-mation so that it is more user-friendly and will work easily
on all user devices. In addition, the working group recom-
mends reviewing/updating the program’s training content to ensure it is all up-to-date and includes CFIT-specific
information from the working group’s efforts.
SE 53, Pressure to Complete a Mission
To identify opportunities for improving awareness of the need to mitigate mission completion pressure on piloting,
including sources and types of pressures, and the impact on
decision-making. External pressures, while difficult to antici -
pate, can influence a pilot’s aeronautical decision-making, causing distraction and potential deviation from standard operating procedures. The SE recommends conducting a
review of existing measures intended to address pressure
to complete a flight, and identifying new opportunities for improved education and outreach to the flying community
on the importance of managing pressure. SE 54, Terrain Awareness and Warning Systems (TA WS)
for GA, Addressing Time-Limited Inhibit, and Future Auto
Ground Collision Avoidance
Improve TAWS capabilities and algorithms to better
protect pilots operating in areas with challenging terrain
and develop additional safety protections to prevent the permanent inhibition of nuisance TAWS alerts during a
terrain-critical flight.
SE 56, UIMC Escape Response
The FAA and industry to form a UIMC escape response
task force, which will look at past LOC analysis as well as
voluntary reports involving UIMC. The group will make
recommendations on revisiting how we teach and train the UIMC escape response maneuver to include an initial
climb before any heading change, should the data support
such a change.
SE 58, Approach Guidance in Night/Mountainous VFR
To further prevent CFIT accidents, the FAA along with
pilot organizations, flight instructor refresher course
(FIRC) providers, and training providers should conduct an education campaign and/or develop learning modules
educating the instrument-current pilot community about
the safety benefits of backing up a nighttime VFR approach
with lateral and vertical navigation guidance, particularly
in mountainous terrain.
Final Steps
The CFIT working group’s efforts ultimately promote a culture shift to improving a pilot’s critical thinking
skills. The research conducted by the team highlighted
that human bias, particularly plan continuation bias,
may be a significant factor in CFIT accidents. It’s
vital for pilots to know how these human biases could negatively influence their decision-making, as well as
learn how to more effectively manage things that we can
control and plan for those that are beyond our control. The SEs were an important step towards not only better
understanding but also helping to advance a data-driven
game plan that tackles CFIT prevention in new and
more meaningful ways.
Nicole Hartman is an FAA Safety Briefing editor and technical writer-editor in the FAA’s Flight
Standards Service. Figure 1. A list of the seven approved CFIT Working Group SEs.
Safety
Enhancement Title
SE-12-R1 Expanded Weather Camera Network
SE-51 Augmented Visual Technology for GA
SE 52 WINGS Program Overhaul
SE 53 Pressure to Complete a Mission
SE-54 TAWS for GA
SE-56 UIMC Escape Response
SE-58 Approach Guidance in Night/Mountainous VFR
SE-45 Maintenance Placard
SE-47 A&P Education and Training
SE-48 Ignition Systems
SE-49 SCF-PP Outreach LEARN MORE
GAJSC Controlled Flight Into Terrain (CFIT) Final Report
gajsc.org/docs
“From the Ground Up, ” FAA Safety Briefing, Nov/Dec 2020
bit.ly/FAASBNovDec2020 (PDF)
22 FAA Safety Briefing
WORKING GROUP V
System Component
Failure — Non-Powerplant
Non-Powerplant Problem Prevention
By Nicole Hartman
The newest addition to the GAJSC’s working group gang
is the System Component Failure — Non-Powerplant
(SCF-NP) Working Group. This latest member was
assembled to examine failures or malfunctions of an aircraft system or component other than the powerplant.
This involves malfunctions in aircraft systems and compo-nents, including pressurization controls, hydraulics, flight
control surfaces, and aircraft structure. The failures that
were analyzed in this study all resulted in a fatal accident.
Participants, Leadership, and Timeframe
The working group was co-chaired by the Experimental Aircraft Association’s (EAA) Government Relations
Director, Tom Charpentier, and Corey Stephens from the
FAA Office of Accident Investigation and Prevention. Some
of the other members include EAA, AOPA, Textron, the
Society of Aviation and Flight Educators (SAFE), National Association of Flight Instructors (NAFI), and Sonex
Aircraft. The team met between 2021 and 2025 and spent
that time looking at the entire dataset of SCF-NP accidents that occurred in a ten-year span. The group followed the
tried-and-true GAJSC process of scoring the contribut-
ing factors to accidents for relevance and prevalence, and
proposing the most effective, data-driven, non-regulatory
mitigations possible. The GAJSC is currently reviewing and voting on the list of safety enhancements (SEs), with a final
report soon to follow.
Methodology and Outcomes
The dataset that the team analyzed was diverse, containing
accidents that involved component failure for any reason,
from maintenance and construction errors to structural
failure caused by aerobatic overstress and flying into
convective activity. The SEs recommended by the group
are similarly diverse, addressing a variety of factors that contributed to serious component failure in general avia-
tion aircraft. These SEs can include utilizing best practices,
training, new technologies, and outreach.
The working group encountered a significant number
of accidents in which the airframe failed before impact with the ground. Except for rare cases where a personal
The SCF-NP Working Group during a meeting at AOPA Headquarters in Frederick, Md.
parachute was worn, the team identified the use of a
whole-airframe parachute system as the only means of
preventing fatal injury following such failure.
Additionally, the team found cases where parachutes
were installed but were either unable to be deployed or
deployed unsuccessfully because of installation or opera-tor error.
Although a detailed analysis of successful aircraft
parachute deployments was beyond the working group’s
work scope, there are documented examples of successful
whole-airframe parachute deployments in the case of struc-
tural failure across a variety of aircraft. As a result, the team
will likely recommend that the FAA and industry educate aircraft owners on the benefits, installation, and appro-
priate use of whole airframe parachute systems, where
available, as an SE.
Another potential outcome is the recommendation for
the FAA and industry to expand awareness of hypoxia symptoms, proper preflight checks of oxygen and pres-
surization systems, and immediate action items in an
emergency. The team identified hypoxia and/or depres-surization as definite causative factors in two of the 52
studied events. The time of useful consciousness (TUC)
is limited above flight level (FL) 180 and decreases
rapidly as one ascends; at FL 250 it is only a few minutes.
In the case of rapid decompression, the TUC is reduced even further. A successful outcome in an emergency is
dependent upon both careful preflight preparation and
an immediate, correct response in an emergency.The team stressed that some immediate action items
must be memorized and accomplished before referring
to a checklist, as prompt corrective action following early
recognition of one’s personal hypoxia symptoms is critical.
The working group is also considering the feasibility of
using flows/situational checklist procedures to augment the use of challenge/response checklists and community educa -
tion on the safe construction, maintenance, and operation of experimental aircraft as SEs to combat non-powerplant system component failure.
SE Success Stories (Coming Soon!)
While there are no approved SEs to share yet, the coming recommendations will no doubt improve aviation safety.
“We had a very dedicated group of subject matter
experts on this working group, ” said the working group
co-chair and EAA Government Relations Director Tom
Charpentier. “These types of accidents are thankfully rare, and the broad definition of SCF-NP made for a dataset in
which few accidents were alike. We are confident that our
proposed enhancements will make this small dataset even smaller in the future. ”
Nicole Hartman is an FAA Safety Briefing editor and technical writer-editor in the FAA’s Flight
Standards Service.
LEARN MORE
GAJSC Safety Reports
gajsc.org/docsThe working group encountered a
significant number of accidents in
which the airframe failed before
impact with the ground.
January/February 2026 23
24 FAA Safety Briefing
MAKING FLYING SAFER WITH
ANGLE OF ATTAC K INDICATORS
Installing This Device Could Save Your Life
By Neil H. Mansharamani
The Impossible Turn
Y ou planned a fun day of flying. Y ou’ve gone through your
safety checklist. Y ou take off with sunshine and blue skies as far as the eye can see. But upon climb out, you face the unexpected
— engine failure. The adrenaline starts to rush. Now what?
Before the fear factor sets in, you need to make a decision.
Many pilots think they can make it back to the runway.
So, they go for the “impossible turn” — a steep-bank turn more than 180 degrees heading back for the runway. But
steep turns in such circumstances can lead to a stall, which
could cause the pilot to lose control of the aircraft.
Such was the case of a fatal accident involving a
Beechcraft B36TC Bonanza in Pembroke Pines, Florida, in
2021. The National Transportation Safety Board issued a final report (download at bit.ly/ERA21FA154) determining
that one of the causal factors was the pilot exceeding the
airplane’s critical angle of attack while turning back to the
airport following the loss of engine power.
Enter Angle of Attack (AoA) Indicators
In a critical situation like this, an AoA indicator is the
pilot’s best friend, helping them avoid an aerodynamic stall.
These indicators feature a series of lights and aural alerts
that change as the aircraft gets closer to an aerodynamic stall. The aural alerts free up the pilot’s vision so they can
focus on what’s outside the window. While most newer
planes come with these indicators preinstalled or available as an option, many older planes require a retrofit. “When you use an AoA indicator, you don’t have to
calculate best glide or guess how close you are to a stall, ” says Karen Kalishek, designated pilot examiner, master instructor, and chair of the National Association of Flight
Instructors. “It provides an ongoing indication of the air -
craft’s available lift and helps to avoid inadvertent stalls. ”
These indicators also enable you to conduct a safe, stable
descent and avoid excessive airspeed that might cause you
to overshoot the runway.
The FAA and GAJSC Recommend AoA Indicators
Loss of control in-flight is the top cause of fatal accidents
in general aviation. The FAA issued a special airworthiness
An illustration that demonstrates the connection between the AOA display and the
condition of the wing.
January/February 2026 25information bulletin (bit.ly/SAIB_AOA) recommending
aircraft operators install and calibrate AoA indicators and
receive training to use them.
The FAA is also collaborating with the GA community
as part of the General Aviation Joint Safety Committee
(GAJSC). To date, the committee has developed 49 safety enhancements to address high-risk areas for a fatal acci-
dent, such as maintaining control during unusual attitudes,
spatial disorientation, and engine failure. To see a full list of their safety enhancements, go to gajsc.org/se .
The GAJSC’s in-flight loss of control study concluded
that greater awareness of AoA effects, coupled with greater
use of available AoA indicators, can reduce the likelihood
of inadvertent loss of control. The committee issued two safety enhancements calling for the installation, training,
and use of AoA indicators as a supplement to existing stall
warning systems in aircraft previously built, currently in
production, and in future designs. To bring greater aware-
ness to the benefits of AoA indicators, the Pilot's Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge will include more information in
its next revision (bit.ly/AeronauticalKnowledge).
In the Simulator
The FAA, GA industry professionals, and the Experimental
Aircraft Association (EAA) teamed up on a study to see
if AoA indicators would help recreational pilots in sce-
narios such as making steep bank turns. At the 2024 EAA AirVenture airshow, they held a clinic where they trained
90 pilots to use these indicators installed on advanced avia-
tion training devices.
This study found that with AoA indicators, pilots knew
precisely how close their aircraft were to stalling. As they became more familiar with the indicator’s visual cues
and aural tones, pilots reported being more confident in
avoiding a stall. This led to more stabilized approaches and improved landings. EAA Safety Committee member Wally Anderson helped lead the clinic, concluding that “ AoA indicators have the biggest potential to prevent loss of
control accidents. ”
But it hits differently when you hear it from a GA
recreational pilot. A participant from last year’s training
session at EAA AirVenture said she decided to install one of these indicators on her aircraft after returning home,
and while flying this past year, she lost an engine on takeoff
at 200 feet. She said the AoA indicator and the training she received saved her life.
Easy to Install. Simple to Learn. Might Save Your Life.
Retrofitting an aircraft with an AoA indicator can be easy
and relatively inexpensive, and the training to use it is simple. There are several brands available on the market,
varying in style and appearance. These can be stand-alone
devices, or increasingly, are included in an aircraft's glass
panel avionics.
The GAJSC is also reaching out to flight schools,
stressing the need for training on these devices. “If flight instructors use them, it will help train the next generation
of pilots to use them too, ” said Corey Stephens, oper -
ations research analyst in the FAA ’s Office of Accident
Investigation and Prevention and co-chair of the GAJSC’s
Safety Analysis Team.
GAJSC’s outreach to pilots and flight schools is part of its
ongoing mission to encourage the GA community to adopt voluntary safety enhancements. Their efforts are making a
big difference. Stephens reported that fiscal year 2024 had
the lowest rate of GA fatal accidents since the FAA began
tracking this metric. The FAA and the GAJSC are commit-
ted to bringing this rate down even further. We want to see flyers enjoying the skies and coming home safely.
Dr. Neil H. Mansharamani is a safety promotion team lead in the FAA Office of Accident
Investigation and Prevention.AOA INDICATORS ENABLE YOU TO CONDUCT A SAFE,
STABLE DESCENT AND AVOID EXCESSIVE AIRSPEED THAT MIGHT CAUSE YOU TO OVERSHOOT THE RUNWAY .
An AoA indicator can help you conduct a safe, stable descent and avoid excessive airspeed
that might cause you to overshoot the runway.
Examples of AoA indicator displays.
F ACING TURBULENCE?
We’ve Got You!
USHST Peer Pilot Program
www.ushstpeer .orgSelf-Help Tools | Talk to a Peer | All Confidential
Spotlight on Safety verticalavi.org/safety/spotlight-on-safety
© 2025 Vertical Aviation International. All Rights Reserved.
SOS_FacingTurbulence FullPage Ad for FAA.indd 1SOS_FacingTurbulence FullPage Ad for FAA.indd 1 2025-05-19 3:27:25 PM2025-05-19 3:27:25 PM
January/February 2026 27
CHECKLIST FAA resources and safety remindersPAUL CIANCIOLO
ONLINE PRESENCE FOR GA SAFETY
The internet is a foundational part of
modern infrastructure. The phrase "if
it's not online, it doesn't exist" reflects
the current reality where online pres-
ence is crucial for visibility, access, and
societal function. However, that digital footprint can get crowded — like tire
marks on a runway over time, obscur -
ing the centerline and other markings.
To enhance the safety of its own
online landing zone, the General
Aviation Joint Safety Committee
(GAJSC) recently rebranded and gave
gajsc.org a fresh coat of paint. With the vital mission to improve general avia-
tion safety, this government-industry
partnership aims to provide users with clear aiming points on its website.
So, before landing at gajsc.org , let’s
do a little preflight planning.
Digital Diagram
The homepage provides a simple
explanation of the GAJSC. If you see a
pop-up window, have no fear — it’s an option to subscribe to periodic email
updates. These updates include new
blog posts and the seasonal FlySafe
Flyer newsletter. There’s also a Subscribe
button in the header. Don’t forget to
confirm your email subscription.
Also, up top is a button to Report
a Safety Issue , where you can follow
specific routes if any of the following
apply to you:
The newly designed GAJSC website.• I think I experienced an aviation
safety-related incident or situation.
• I think I experienced an equipment problem, like a malfunction or
defect.
• I was in an aircraft accident or wit-
nessed an aircraft accident.
• I am concerned about a possible illegal air charter operation.
• I witnessed an aviation safety incident.
Alpha through Golf
If you don’t like getting lost while
taxiing at an unfamiliar airport,
you probably don’t like getting lost
navigating a website. That’s why we reduced the menu to six options
without any submenus.
The Monthly Fly Safe Topics
promote GA safety topics each month
that support or are directly related to the GAJSC’s safety enhancements.
To foster a stronger and more unified
safety culture, industry partners are encouraged to use their own outreach
channels to promote and distribute
these materials to the GA community
to help mitigate known safety risks.
Safety Enhancements are interven -
tion strategies to prevent or mitigate problems associated with accident
causes. These may include procedures, training, and equipment installations
that, when implemented, may reduce the likelihood of accidents in the future. Each topic is expandable and
contains at least one icon to denote the
intended audience: pilots, mechanics,
flight instructors, and industry. Under each, there may be additional links for
further knowledge.
The Reports & Documents menu
offers a robust list of working group reports, recommendation letters,
performance metrics, the GAJSC
charter, and the brand guide, to
name a few. On a side note, the 2012 Loss of Control on Approach and
Landing final report is the most
downloaded document.
News Briefs shows all blog content
published. This includes the monthly Fly Safe topics and announcements,
such as the 2022 Midair Collision
Report summary and link.
The Newsletter tab vectors you
direct to the FlySafe Flyer . The page
has a subscription option and a digital
newsletter archive going back to its
creation in the spring of 2024.
Lastly, the Partners menu shows
all the GAJSC chartered partners and observers, along with links to each organization.
Frequency Change
Like our safety culture of continu-
ous improvement, there’s room to ensure the digital centerline of general
aviation safety remains clear, mobile-
friendly, and has a practical user
experience. If you have suggestions or
comments about gajsc.org, send them to admin@gajsc.org .
Paul Cianciolo is an associate editor and the social media
lead for FAA Safety Briefing. He is a U.S. Air Force veteran,
and a rated aircrew member and volunteer public affairs
officer with Civil Air Patrol.
TO ENHANCE THE SAFETY OF ITS
OWN ONLINE LANDING ZONE,
THE GAJSC RECENTLY REBRANDED AND GAVE GAJSC.ORG
A FRESH COAT OF PAINT.
28 FAA Safety Briefing
DRONE DEBRIEF drone safety roundupREBEKAH WATERS
TEAMING UP FOR DRONE SAFETY
Drones are unleashing
U.S. productivity,
creating high-skilled
jobs, and reshaping
the future of aviation.
Building a strong and
secure domestic drone
sector is vital to reducing reliance on foreign sources, strengthening critical supply chains, and ensuring
that the benefits of this technology
are delivered to the American people.
This Administration emphasizes the
existing need to address the rapid evolution of aerospace operations, the
future of drone integration into the
National Airspace System (NAS), and the expansion of safety management
systems (SMS) across the aviation
industry (bit.ly/WhDdEo). The Drone
Safety Team (DST) is underway in
putting these efforts into action, ensuring the safe and efficient integra -
tion of drones into our skies.
The team is an industry-led, FAA-
supported partnership committed to identifying and addressing safety risks associated with drone operations. It
was created to analyze drone-related
safety data and identify emerging threats that drones may pose to air -
craft, people, and property. The DST is tasked with promoting an indus-
try-government partnership that is
collaborative, data-driven, and uses a voluntary approach to the manage-
ment of drone safety.
At DST meetings, representatives
from industry and government work together towards one goal: enabling
the safe integration of drones into the
NAS. Like the other aviation safety
teams within industry, they work to define consen -
sus-based safety enhance -
ments based on a data-
driven process
and collaboration among industry members.
During a DST meeting in 2019,
the team discussed ways to improve
drone-specific safety data collection.
This prompted a two-fold solution. First, the team looked at creating a
drone-specific reporting form for
NASA ’s Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS). Second, the team
asked the FAA to ensure drone pilots
were included in the FAA ’s Voluntary
Reporting Program, which offers
pilots protection when self-reporting.
Representatives from industry,
NASA, and the FAA worked together to create a form tailored to the unique aspects of drone operations that would
ensure the collection of useful, mean-
ingful safety data. Anyone involved
in drone operations can use the UAS/
Drone Report Form to report close calls, hazards, violations, and safety-
related incidents. Learn more about ASRS at go.nasa.gov/4nIhHmc .
Simultaneously, the FAA was
working on an update to Advisory Circular (AC) 00-46F, Aviation Safety
Reporting Program , which enables the
non-punitive nature of the ASRS, to
include drone pilots. Y ou can read this
AC at bit.ly/AC00-46F .
Since then, the DST has established
two workgroups: the Drone Safety
Data workgroup (DSD WG) and the SMS work -
group (SMS
WG). The
DSD WG is
focused on
improving data
quality and stan-
dardization to build
a strong foundation for
drone safety analysis. The SMS
WG is focused on developing practi-cal, scalable SMS guidance and tools
for drone operations of all sizes that
will help foster a strong safety culture
in the drone industry.
Over the next few years, the DST
will work towards implementing a full safety metrics framework, launching public-facing safety materials, and
establishing risk detection and mit-
igation systems modeled after other
aviation safety teams. Whatever the
future of full drone integration brings, the DST will be there, building trust
and confidence among industry and
the public with its collaborative, data-
driven approach enhancing the safety of the NAS.
Rebekah Waters is an FAA Safety Briefing associate
editor. She is a technical writer-editor in the FAA’s Flight
Standards Service.
LEARN MORE
Drone Safety Team
bit.ly/DSThome
“Drone Reports for ASRS, ” FAA Safety Briefing,
Jan/Feb 2023
bit.ly/ASRS4Drones
NUTS, BOL TS, AND ELECTRONS GA maintenance issuesREBEKAH WATERS
FIGHTING FLIGHT CONTROL CABLE FAILURES
If you’ve seen the Aviation
Maintenance Safety Moments video,
“Flight Control Cable Failures, ” which
came out in July of this year, you know
about the significant risk to flight
safety posed by chaffing, misrouting cables, the use of unapproved parts,
or improper inspection procedures.
But do you know what inspired the creation of this video? The story begins
with two brothers who share a passion
for safety: Jamie and Jackie Black.
Jackie Black is the division manager
of the FAA ’s Aircraft Maintenance Division (AFS-300). Jamie is a volun-
teer FAASTeam Industry Member for
the state of Arkansas who retired from the FAA after more than 23 years.
When multiple maintenance provid -
ers were approaching Jamie about control cable issues — a problem that stems from improper maintenance —
he knew just who to reach out to: his little brother, Jackie.
Throughout his career in aviation
safety, Jamie made friends and built relationships both in the FAA and the
aviation industry. A just safety culture
was the cornerstone of these relation-
ships. This kind of relationship building
and safety culture is not something that happens overnight. It is the result
of a career and lifetime of intent, and
a passion for improving safety. This commitment explains why maintenance
providers felt comfortable sharing their
concerns about cable failures, docu-
mented with photos and videos, with
Jamie. Due to the number of concerns shared with Jamie, he surmised that the
issue is likely widespread.
Jackie connected Jamie with David
Hays, a safety inspector in the GA air -
craft maintenance section of AFS-300.
They teamed up to produce a video that
focused on flight control cable failures, how they directly affect a pilot’s ability to control various flight surfaces, and
explained potential causes, signs, and prevention strategies. With more than
20,000 views, this video is just one of the
multiple tools AFS-300 is leveraging to get the word out about this important
safety issue. Watch the full video at
bit.ly/FAAcables.
Rebekah Waters is an FAA Safety Briefing associate
editor. She is a technical writer-editor in the FAA’s Flight
Standards Service.
LEARN MORE
AC 43.13-1B, Acceptable Methods, Techniques, and
Practices — Aircraft Inspection and Repair
bit.ly/AC43131B
Search FAA Special Airworthiness Information
Bulletins (SAIBs)
bit.ly/FAASAIB
Search FAA Airworthiness Directives (ADs)
bit.ly/ADFAA
PART 145 REPAIR STATIONS SMS IMPLEMENTATION REQUIREMENTS
Y ou may have heard the FAA and
European Union Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA) recently signed
Bilateral Oversight Board (BOB)
Decision No. 13, requiring all U.S.-
based 14 CFR part 145 repair stations holding an EASA part 145 certificate
to implement a safety management
system (SMS). U.S. maintenance organizations interested in maintain-
ing their EASA certifications had
until Dec. 31, 2025, to satisfy these
requirements. One option available
to meet the new SMS requirement is the FAA ’s SMS Voluntary Program (SMSVP). (See FAA Order 8900.1, Volume 17, Chapter 3, Section 1 at
bit.ly/8900v17ch3.)
Whether you’re just getting started
or fully underway with your efforts
to develop and implement an SMS, you can go to the FAA ’s SMS webpage
at bit.ly/faasms to get a jumpstart
on guidance documents and access
good-to-know information like
“Corporate SMS” and “How To”
suggestions. The good news is there’s
no need to reinvent the wheel. The
FAA ’s basic interest is that you build your SMS in a way that makes sense to your organization while meeting the basic Part 5 requirements.
The FAA streamlined the SMSVP
process, removing bureaucratic
hurdles, and aligned it with what’s
required for part 121, 135, and 91.147 air tour operators. This means once
your organization has developed and
implemented its SMS, you notify the FAA via a formal Declaration of
Compliance, indicating your SMS
meets the part 5 requirements. From
there, the FAA will simply assess the
performance of your SMS during normal surveillance.
January/February 2026 29
30 FAA Safety Briefing
VERTICALLY SPEAKING safety issues for rotorcraft pilotsLEAH MURPHY
STAYING COHERENT AT THE COLLECTIVE
Fatigue is one of the most dangerous
risks in aviation because it hides in
plain sight. Although I have always
respected the importance of fatigue
management, it was not until I began
working in the air ambulance industry that I fully recognized my responsibil-
ity to ensure I was rested for duty.
Transitioning into night shift flying
forced me to reevaluate how I manage my rest. Sleep during the day is
unnatural, and it took trial and error to
create an environment that allowed me
to be truly rested before a long night of flying. I became intentional — block-
ing out light, reducing distractions, and
sometimes saying no to social activi-ties to prioritize the rest that my role
demands. It is not just about protecting
myself; it is about protecting my crew
and the passengers who rely on us to
arrive safely. Being proactive about rest is just as important as completing a
checklist or reviewing the weather. It is
part of my job.
The volunteer-driven U.S.
Helicopter Safety Team (USHST) is also being proactive about the risks of
fatigue on the flight deck. Its mission
is to develop, deliver, and advo-cate practical safety resources that
strengthen safety culture and enhance
performance across the rotorcraft com-
munity. With the vision of zero fatal
civil helicopter accidents, the USHST has developed a series of helicopter safety enhancements (H-SEs). These enhancements target preventable acci-
dent causes, such as wire strikes, loss
of control, and maintenance errors, by offering operators practical, data-
driven strategies to mitigate risk. Each
enhancement is designed to address
known hazards and strengthen the
safety culture across the industry.
Among these initiatives, one of
the most pressing is H-SE 23-04, Fatigue Risk Management , which aims
to improve fatigue awareness and risk mitigation of scheduling factors leading to fatigue. Fatigue has long
been recognized as a silent threat to
aviation safety, but it is often under -
reported and misunderstood. Since
1990, the NTSB has identified fatigue
in only 33 helicopter accidents, yet
research across industries suggests
fatigue is a factor in roughly 20% of all safety incidents. That gap highlights
how difficult fatigue is to identify after
an accident and how frequently its role may be overlooked.
A recent USHST white paper about
fatigue risk management stresses
that current practices fall short.
Traditionally, helicopter operators have relied on self-assessment, expecting
pilots and maintenance personnel to
judge, for themselves, whether they
are too tired to perform safely. The
problem is that fatigue under -
mines judgment. Sleep-deprived individuals underestimate
their deficits, take risks they would otherwise avoid, and
may feel pressure to continue
a flight even when they know
they should stop. Several tragic
accidents illustrate this reality: pilots falling asleep at the con-
trols, fatigued search and rescue crews pressing ahead under pressure, and maintenance staff making prevent-
able mistakes after extended shifts.
To combat these risks, USHST calls
for operators to implement fatigue
risk management programs (FRMPs) as part of their safety management
systems (SMS). A strong FRMP
includes objective methods for identi-fying when fatigue poses a hazard and
implementing mitigation strategies
and tracking mechanisms to measure
program effectiveness over time.
While operators must provide the
tools, the pilot’s responsibility is to make safe decisions. Every pilot has
the obligation to decline a flight if they are not fit for duty.
When pilots, maintenance staff,
and operators all take fatigue seri-
ously, we can reduce accidents. The
USHST’s fatigue initiative reminds us that safety does not come from luck
or pushing through. It comes from
preparation, honesty, and the disci-
pline to say “not today” when fatigue
makes flight unsafe.
Leah Murphy is a dual-rated flight instructor and helicopter
air ambulance pilot. She is also an FAA Safety Team Repre -
sentative in Cleveland, Ohio.
Editor’s Note: In October 2025, at the 40th Women in Aviation
(womeninaerospace.org) awards ceremony, Leah Murphy was honored with the Initiative, Inspiration, and Impact Award for her outstanding aviation safety volunteerism and relentless advocacy, inspiring the next generation of women in aerospace.
LEARN MORE
H-SE 23-04, Fatigue Risk Management
ushst.pulsarinformatics.com
Don’t Fly Fatigued Video
bit.ly/fatiguevideo
Sunset on a rooftop helipad in Cleveland, Ohio. (Photo by Leah Murphy)
FLIGHT FORUM
Check out our GA Safety
Facebook page at
Facebook.com/groups/GASafety .
If you’re not a member, we encourage you to join the group of nearly 17,000 participants in the GA community who share safety principles and best practices, participate in positive and safe engagement with the FAA Safety Team (FAASTeam), and post relevant GA content that makes the National Airspace System safer.
January/February 2026 31
letters from the FAA Safety Briefing mailbagAmphibious Observations
“Seaplanes and Safety”
(bit.ly/SafeSeaplane) was
well written with great emphasis on the
gear position differences and the focus on "crew" inclusion in the process. The
Seaplane Pilots Association has been
working hard to get the word out, and much has been written on the topic, but
we still find many experienced pilots
getting into trouble. One common theme is pattern work.
When taking off and landing at an
airport with amphibious floats, the tendency can be to leave the gear down,
citing reasons like: you're going to just
be putting it down again, saving cycles
on the landing gear, or that it makes
no difference aerodynamically, just to mention a few.
We are creatures of habit, and we need
to practice good habits. Great landings
begin long before touchdown — with
a good pattern, stable approach, and checklist use. Forming good habits for
water landings must be consistent.
And, that habit mentioned for takeoff
of a positive rate and gear up is of
utmost importance.
Unfortunately, many pilots have been
told to wait until there is not sufficient
runway left to put the gear back down
if needed. That's a terrible idea for two
reasons: first, it breaks the good habit you're trying to form. Second, should
you have to put it back on the runway,
it could and very often does result in a runway overrun. In most of those cases,
they would have been much better off
with the gear up anyway.
But, it's still the most rewarding flying
you'll ever do. Stay sharp and be safe.
— Brewster
Thanks for reading and sharing your
insights, Brewster! We couldn’t agree
more that consistency is key. Advice for an Amateur
A member recently posted on the
General Aviation Safety Facebook
group, looking for safety tips for a
new pilot, and the group was eager to
help. Check out the thread at
(bit.ly/FBPilotTips) to get some tips
or add your own.
The most important decision you will
make is whether you should take off in the first place. Is the weather good enough?
Will it stay good enough? Are the winds
within your capabilities? USE the checklist
for every phase of flight, every time, no
matter your experience level.— Jim
Visit your local ATC facility. Talk to the
controllers. Focus on the right
radio lexicon.— Jeff
Takeoffs are optional.
Landings are inevitable.
— Chris
Seek an experienced instructor.
— Keith
Always do a preflight and follow the
checklist! Never assume!— Donna
Regardless of everything else, fly
the aircraft.
— Pat
For more stories and news,
check out our blog “Cleared for Takeoff” at medium.com/FAA .
Let us hear from you! Send your
comments, suggestions, and questions
to SafetyBriefing@faa.gov . You can
also reach us on X (formerly known as Twitter) @FAASafetyBrief.
We may edit letters for style and/or
length. Due to our publishing schedule, responses may not appear for several issues. While we do not print anony-mous letters, we will withhold names or send personal replies upon request. If you have a concern with an immediate FAA operational issue, contact your local Flight Standards District Office or air traffic facility.
32 FAA Safety Briefing
ON FINAL an editor's perspective
TOM HOFFMANN
DON’T GET TONGUE-TIED WITH AVIATION SAFETY
GAJSC — it's an acronym, or more
specifically, an initialism, that doesn’t
exactly roll off the tongue. I’ve heard
some attempts to pronounce it Jazz-ik,
or Gazz-ik, which never stuck. But
that’s ok. I kind of prefer this matter-of-fact abbreviation to some of the
overly clever attempts to “namify” or
reverse engineer words to something more convenient. It simply stands for
what it is — General Aviation Joint
Safety Committee. Incidentally, the
committee’s name did change a few
years back — the S was changed from Steering to Safety. The change more
appropriately represents the group,
but it is still just as hard to say.
While many pilots may not know
what the GAJSC is, we’ve been on a mission to change that. This issue
of FAA Safety Briefing magazine is
just one step towards accomplishing
that goal. As you’ll read elsewhere in
these pages, the GAJSC has been on
the leading edge of advancing safety
in the general aviation community
for nearly thirty years. In fact, it just wrapped up a working group
that took a closer look at accidents
involving non-engine-related compo-nent failures (see the article “System
Component Non-Powerplant" for
more). The group put forth 12 new
safety intervention strategies — or safety enhancements (SEs) — aimed
at reducing fatal accidents in this category. These are in addition to
the 46 existing SEs the committee
developed that cover everything from aeronautical decision making to the
WINGS Pilot Proficiency Program.
I realize the term safety enhance-
ment might not ring a bell, but you’re
likely familiar with some of the many important outcomes SEs have helped
cultivate and achieve. For example,
the FAA ’s revised policy on streamlin-
ing the installation of angle of attack
(AoA) indicators made it much more affordable to integrate this life-saving
technology into your aircraft. The
GAJSC’s first two SEs helped make that possible.
Or perhaps you’ve noticed the FAA ’s
new over-the-counter (OTC) med-
ication reference guide: W hat OTC
Medications Can I Take and Still Be
Safe to Fly? at bit.ly/OTCMedstoFly .
The need for increased focus and clarity on safe medication use came straight from the GAJSC’s analysis of
hundreds of fatal accidents. Y ou can
find many more examples of aviation
safety success stories attributable to the
GAJSC within these pages.
I’ve been fortunate to work with
the GAJSC for several years now and have seen firsthand the unique value
of this committee. I’ll say it’s a true
cornucopia of general aviation knowl-edge and expertise. And there’s a clear
emphasis on the “J” of this joint safety
committee. Government, industry, and academia groups are all part of
the equation, with 26 partners and
observer organizations listed on its
website at gajsc.org/partners. Many
other organizations are also brought in to assist with research or to share their
expertise as needed. A few years ago, I was asked to help
establish and co-chair the GAJSC’s Communications and Outreach
Working Group that was tasked with fine-tuning its communications
strategy. Together with my industry
co-chair, Bob Rockmaker, presi-
dent and CEO of the Flight School
Association of North America, we’ve worked hard to promote the GAJSC's
great work and raise awareness about
this committee’s collaborative role in
the GA community.
A few of our accomplishments
include creating a revised branding
scheme with a new logo and tagline, overhauling and updating the website
at gajsc.org, and starting a newslet-
ter — the FlySafe Flyer (subscribe at
gajsc.org/newsletter) — to provide aviation stakeholders with GAJSC news and relevant safety information.
We’ve also worked on enhancing
and increasing awareness of our Fly
Safe topics of the month, where we
provide more details about certain SEs at gajsc.org/flysafe .
Names can be deceiving, so I’m
hopeful our focus on increasing aware-ness of this somewhat tongue-twisting
acronym — GAJSC — will make you pause and take notice of the work and
incredible value this team provides to
the GA community.
Tom Hoffmann is the editor of FAA Safety Briefing. He is a
commercial pilot and holds an A&P certificate. WHILE MANY PILOTS MAY NOT
KNOW WHAT THE GAJSC IS, WE’VE BEEN ON A MISSION TO CHANGE THAT.
FAA FACESFAA employee profile
PAUL CIANCIOLO
CHRISTOPHER GOMES
Operational Safety Analyst, FAA Office of Accident Investigation and Prevention
Let a kid play with remote-controlled
airplanes; of course he will become
obsessed with aviation. Then, add the
opportunity to take aerospace science
courses in high school; that’s a win
for developing future aviators! This is the way.
It’s the vector Christopher Gomes
navigated before earning his private pilot certificate shortly after high
school. He continued on the path to
receive a bachelor’s degree in aviation
business administration from Emb-
ry-Riddle Aeronautical University. After graduation, Christopher was
offered a job with the FAA ’s Air Traffic
Safety Oversight Service. He took a brief detour from federal service to
work for Booz Allen Hamilton before
veering back to the FAA in 2018.
“In the Air Traffic Organiza-
tion, I supported the integration of drones and commercial space
operations, along with monitoring
air traffic acquisition programs for
cost, schedule, and performance, ”
notes Christopher. “Then in 2024, I joined the Integrated Safety Teams
Branch, bringing my experiences
from different FAA lines of business to help facilitate and move aviation
safety forward. ”
Under the FAA ’s Office of Accident
Investigation and Prevention, this
small branch integrates and harmo-nizes the work of joint government
and industry safety teams like the U.S.
Aviation Safety Team (USAST), Gen-eral Aviation Joint Safety Committee
(GAJSC), U.S. Helicopter Safety Team (USHST) and Commercial Aviation
Safety Team (CAST) to support the
implementation of safety enhance -
ments in the national airspace system.
“These safety teams are fantastic
examples of public-private partnerships
where we can bring the agency and
its industry stakeholders together to
collectively identify emerging aviation safety issues and work towards volun-
tarily mitigating them, ” he explains.
Each team is driven by its own
community goals and issues; however,
aviation issues often are cross-domain — general aviation and commercial or
fixed-wing and rotorcraft. The branch
helps ensure alignment among the different teams, ensuring each is aware
of problems affecting other communi-
ties and harmonized in their approach
to mitigating issues.
“One of the most exciting and
obvious accomplishments that we’re proud of is that the GAJSC and
general aviation community are continuing to meet and exceed their
safety goals for the year, which can
be attributed to the success of the
safety teams, ” explains Christopher.
“Other successes include delivering recommendations for improving
outcomes during unintended flight
into instrument meteorological con-
ditions (IMC) and proposed safety
enhancements addressing general aviation non-powerplant system
component failures. ”
The branch is also conducting two
studies on mid-air collision risk at certain small airports and identifying
risks during circle-to-land instrument
approaches. This work should lead
to safety enhancements that further reduce the risk of accidents in the
GA community. These enhancements
cannot happen without data. Christopher is also involved with a
large-scale modernization of the Avi-
ation Safety Information and Analysis
Sharing (ASIAS) program to enhance data availability. ASIAS (asias.faa.gov)
is a collaborative government-industry
partnership that enables data sharing
and analysis of safety data. Industry
stakeholders can voluntarily contribute safety data that enables broader, sys -
temic analysis to identify system-wide hazards before accidents or incidents
occur. He also works with pilots, opera-
tors, manufacturers, training/academia, industry associations, etc., to conduct
analyses within the program to help
identify risks and issues in the system.
“Our safety teams have worked so
well because they have committed to this data-driven approach for mitigat-
ing the contributing factors of general
aviation’s top killers, ” notes Christo-pher. “ A big challenge is for us to stay
data-driven to reduce the number of
fatalities when there is a lot of public attention and pressure after a safety
event occurs within the GA commu-
nity. Public attention and pressure can
detract from our safety team’s goals by
diverting resources to mitigate events that may not be a high priority as
identified in our data. ”
Christopher’s advice
for his fellow GA pilots is to follow the
data and take time
to review the GAJSC monthly Fly Safe
topics. These are based
on data-driven safety enhancements that can reduce the
number of fatal accidents.
Paul Cianciolo is an associate editor and the social media
lead for FAA Safety Briefing. He is a U.S. Air Force veteran
and an auxiliary airman with Civil Air Patrol.
U.S. Department
of Transportation
Federal Aviation
Administration
800 Independence Ave., S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20591
FORWARDING SERVICE REQUESTED
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
LOOK WHO’S READING
FAA Safety Briefing
“When I’m not on an adventure in the clouds,
I’m keeping current on GA safety!”
— Kay Hall
server turned pilot, social media influencer, author
@FlyWithKay
Fly GACA is an independent educational platform. It is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or operated by the General Authority of Civil Aviation (GACA) or the Government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The official and authoritative source for all civil aviation regulations, publications, and aeronautical information is always GACA. Always verify against the latest official GACA publication at gaca.gov.sa.