Nobody could have envisaged that in spite of the experiences of the nation in the four airplane crashes in 2005 and 2006 and our very poor performances in the Search and Rescue operations during these events, we could yet be brought to an unimaginable embarrassment in the last few weeks in our search efforts for the missing of an airplane within the Nigerian airspace – definitely not with the intervention of N19.5bn released by the FG to fix those gaps that have been identified in the Paul Dike Report. These gaps include the safety and security infrastructure of our airports as well as the airspace Navigational aids Communication and Surveillance Systems (CNS) and the Weather Systems.

The disappearance on March 15 2008 of the Wing Aviation aircraft from the surveillance of the authority responsible for the airspace management and air traffic services system is yet another broken ‘links or gaps’ in the system we have put in place. The management of the aeronautical Search and Rescue operation is even more worrisome and gives one the impression that we have learnt absolutely nothing from the experiences of the past for us to build public confidence in all our efforts. There are still many other gaps that are yearning for urgent action if we do not want to put out collective lives in danger.

The Nigerian airspace covers over I million sq km which includes all the territorial geographical boundaries including the coastal areas extended. It is designated by International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) as the Nigerian flight information region (FIR) and its management from ground level to infinity is that of the Nigerian Airspace Management Agency (NAMA).

Consequently, all flights in and out of the country including transiting flights over the Nigerian airspace, and all flights within the country flying from one airport to another including airstrips are required by national regulations domesticated after the international SARPs, to file and lodge their flight plans with appropriate NAMA authority at the airport of departure. This is not for control purposes only; it is also for monitoring all flight movement whether or not they require air traffic control services.

Turning to the events of March 15 2008, the public is right to be concerned and worried that our failure to provide proper air traffic management for the missing aircraft puts the Nigerian airspace in jeopardy always. Above all, our inability to provide or assemble organized and efficient SAR with appropriate resources even after the experiences of 2005 and 2006 is not just a national calamity but a national disgrace.

Beechcraft 1900 belonging to Wing Aviation like any flight flying within the Nigerian FIR and flying from one airport into an airstrip, filed a flight plan that was accepted, approved and was cleared by the NAMA authority at Lagos airport for the route of the flight from Lagos to Bebi. From Lagos to Enugu, the aircraft flew within the controlled airspace and was in the control of NAMA authorities at Lagos, Port – Harcourt and Enugu.

The en route profile of the flight from Enugu to Bebi particularly the portion of the flight outside Enugu control airspace is a responsibility of the FIC, the NAMA designated authority at Lagos. This center provides services information for aircraft flying within uncontrolled airspace. Such information includes aeronautical and meteorological information services and more importantly Alerting Services. What would have also made a remarkable difference in the missing aircraft saga is a surveillance system like the radar. On the day of the incidence, there was none along the routes of the Beechraft flight that would have helped to determine the point of disappearance of the aircraft.

Under the Nigerian Civil Aviation Regulation (NCAR) Part 14 section 4 sub-section 52, NAMA is expected to have MOUs with the appropriate public and private agencies providing resources and services, define the types and number of resources required including manpower for SAR operations.

The plan makes provision also for regular auditing of the equipment and manpower and regular conduct of mock exercise to test the status of the systems in place in readiness for real situation. Should it be envisaged that the resources available from municipal, local, state or private agencies at anytime before or during the SAR operation will not be sufficient or effective to achieve the desired result, the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) will be contacted especially if it’s Disaster Reaction Units (DRUs) are not within the environment where the incident has occurred.

The truth in our environment is, whenever there are air plane crashes or the incidence like the missing plane, our aeronautical SAR plan is not comprehensive and does not sufficiently include the coordination of appropriate public and private agencies resources that are critical to the plan or the agency responsible for coordinating the operation of the plan has no capacity to coordinate these agencies

The NCAR designed after an ICAO requirement mandates all aircraft in Nigeria to carry on board Emergency Locator Transmitter (ELT) on 406Mhz with effect from January 2008. However, an aircraft or a ship mounted with ELT must register its registered number identification and ELT code number with NEMA for it to be adequately identified by the COSPASS – SATSAR in the event of any emergency or distress. These information automatically displayed with the coordination and location makes it possible for NEMA to alert and notify the aircraft operators or appropriate service providers like NAMA in case of an aircraft or NIMASA in the case of a ship. The information further helps to tailor appropriate SAR resources to the distress aircraft or ship.

Unfortunately, up till now, there is no evidence showing that NEMA or any other COSPAS – SATSAR receiver station in Spain, France or Canada picked any ELT signal from any aircraft in emergency from Nigeria during this period. The only evidence available up till now was that the aircraft was overdue to arrive Obudu, and never arrived till date.

Following the alerting phase by NAMA, everyone including the agencies responsible for SAR assumed that the aircraft must have crashed. We were also faced with various speculations especially when there was no signal from the aircraft ELT that would have provided us coordinates that was to help in locating the site of a crash if ever there was one. Such speculations have become hindrances to our SAR efforts and there were many of them which included the assumptions - that the aircraft was probably not carrying an ELT and if it did, the ELT was probably not functioning. Another assumption was that, probably at the point of crash, the impact on the sueface was more than 8gs (8 x Force of Gravity), the permissible resistance for the ELT on any impact beyond which the ELT could have been damaged.
Had the aircraft been monitored under a radar surveillance services, the appropriate ATS / FIC could have obtained a fix from the point of disappearance to compliment or in this present circumstances supplement signals from the ELT to locate the drop of the aircraft.

Alternatively, had our towers been fitted with Automatic Direction Finder (ADF) and the aircraft Pilot had time to activate the 121.5Mhz distress radio, the FIC could through ADF readings from any 2 airports obtain a fix which could have been sufficient to get a general area with about 1nm or 2 km accuracy to the location of the aircraft.

There are attempts by some concerns to link the presumed accident of the Wing Aviation aircraft to other tragic aircraft crashes of 2005 to 2007 particularly the Military Dornier aircraft crash of September 17 2006. Until the reports of these crashes are released and the missing aircraft is found and proper investigations are carried out, it will be wrong to speculate on the cause of the loss. We do however know that weather was a factor in the loss of the Dornier aircraft. However SARPs require pilots to approach airstrips like Bebi visually. In this case pilots are responsible for their own terrain clearance and must not descend below the lowest safe altitude until they have the runway in sight and can be assured of safe landing while remaining clear of the cloud.

Secondly it is being argued now, that the air traffic control service at Bebi is not up to standard. One may also ask that what is the standard air traffic control service for an airstrip that has no established or defined controlled airspace? To the best of my knowledge, no control airspace has been established at Bebi airstrip to warrant any air traffic control services.

The aircraft has also not crashed at Bebi and there is no evidence yet to prove that the loss of the aircraft was due to the landing facilities at Bebi airstrip. However, should there have been any reason to consider flying to the airstrip unsafe on March 15 2008, it would have been the duty of NAMA authority at the aerodrome of departure under its safety management system to draw the attention of the pilot to appropriate NOTAMS that it has issued on Bebi airstrip, caution him, or if the situation at Bebi was that critical, deny him approval to operate when he presented his flight plan.

In general, we are all wrong when we think always that every aircraft crash or incident of missing aircraft (or local fire in the market place or incidence of the oil pipe line on fire, urban area flooding, collapse building or ship wreck) is a national emergency and therefore a matter for NEMA. Aircraft crashing or missing like the Beechcraft is an accident and must be treated as such within the context of ICAO SARPS and NCAR provisions.

Secondly, we relied too much on the satellite based ELT which is basically meant to provide within an accuracy of about 100m the coordinates of the location of the distress vehicle or object the coordinate provided by ELT is only an aid for search operation and not the means for rescue operation. We are still deficient in our search operation efforts. Even when we locate, we lack the capability to organize and deploy appropriate resources for rescue operations particularly in terrains like mountainous, dessert, jungle forest and swampy areas including rescue on the sea and rivers.

Presently, we have no capital to fund or provide the required SAR resources including personnel for autonomous agencies like NEMA to cover the length and breath of the Country. We must therefore at least for now, task the municipal, local and state government authorities and agencies including private agencies and NGOs to provide additional resources needed to complement available public resources of Federal Government or NEMA. In addition, we need to establish MOU with these private agencies and NGOs and device means of funding SAR operations and remunerating agencies that provide SAR resources and services. These are not new suggestions, but are provided for in the Nigeria Civil Aviation Regulation part 14 Section 4 subsection 52.