Ground Handling Agent

In fact, (and until relatively recently), there had not been any ‘international’ compulsion on aircraft operators and GHAs to prepare and practise such emergency response plans at all – yet alone jointly / together. (Although many airlines did so of course – but typically in an unregulated, un-coordinated and non-standardised manner. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for the vast majority of GHAs)

ICAOs (International Civil Aviation Organisation) Safety Management System (SMS) and other related requirements + IATA‘s (International Air Transport Association) IOSA / ISSA audits etc. are now gradually improving this situation for airlines / aircraft operators. Similar applies (for GHAs) in the shape of appropriate elements of IATA’s ‘Airport Handling Manual’ (AHM) + its inclusive ‘Standard Ground Handling Agreement’ (SGHA) section and associated ‘Ground Operations Manual’ (IGOM) + the (IATA’s) ‘ISAGO audit’ for GHAs

In marked contrast, commercially licenced airports are typically required (and have been for many years) to prepare and practice (exercise) airport emergency plans – AEP. However, and despite the best efforts of ICAO, ACI (Airports Council International) and others – there is still no viable degree of effective, worldwide AEP standardisation yet evident. This situation is unlikely to change (as at 2023) anytime soon

This latter (lack of effective AEP standardisation worldwide) is a major source of frustration for aircraft operators (typically passenger airlines) needing e.g. to customise their own ERPs to the AEPs of EACH regular destination airport (station / out-station) to which they operate  i.e. hundreds of different, destination airports (and thus different AEPs) in the case of some of the larger airlines. (In this context only, the largest such airline [as at 2022] internationally was Turkish Airlines – with around 310 different destinations – almost 250 being international [i.e. outside of Turkey itself])

Some (but by no means all) aircraft operators already understand that their own ERPs must be modified / customised to the AEPs of each and every regular destination airport which they serve. To do this for a large airline network (such as Turkish Airlines) involves an immense amount of work, training, exercising and maintenance etc. Accordingly, some (too many) aircraft operators ignore or only pay ‘lip-service’ to this vital requirement

In such matters the GHA is often in the unenviable ‘between a rock and a hard place’ situation of trying to manage the (often widely differing) ERP requirements of client aircraft operators with those of the appropriate (GHA’s) parent airport AEP

The problem is compounded further if the GHA also (rarely as at 2024) has its own emergency response plan in place for its parent airport (a very small number do – the vast majority don’t). And yes – in such circumstances it is always the requirements of the parent AEP which MUST typically override

But what if the parent AEP is not ‘fit for purpose’ in the first place? (and there are many which are so unfit [or even non-existent] – despite the associated, mandatory airport licencing requirements already referred to further above)!!!