European Aviation Safety Agency (Easa) Vs Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)

Running head: EUROPEAN AVIATION SAFETY AGENCY (EASA) VS FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION (FAA)
EUROPEAN AVIATION SAFETY AGENCY (EASA) VS FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION (FAA)

Aviation Safety
Name
Professor
Institution
Course
Date

European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) is an agency of the European Union headquartered in Cologne, Germany. This agency is mandated with regulatory and executive responsibilities in the field of civilian aviation safety. Some of the agencies tasks include; safety research analysis, giving expert advice to the European Union for new legislature drafting, aircraft design approvals and authorization of non-European Union (third country) operators. (Oliveto, 2015).The main aim of the paper is to compare the similarities and differences between EASA (European Aviation Safety Agency)
According to Wise (2016), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is the United States of America’s aviation authority mandated with the responsibility of setting up all aspects of federal civil aviation regulations. These rules are supposed to govern all flight operations in the United States of America. The other responsibilities executed by the FAA include; enhancing and operating air traffic control for all military and civilian operations, new civil aviation technology development, controlling commercial space transportation as well as regulating and monitoring related environmental concerns of civil aviation.
In this regard, given the detailed explanation for the mandates of both regulatory authorities (EASA & FAA), any similarities and differences between the two can clearly be drawn to explain similar or varied aspects of responsibilities and mandates for each aviation authority. Mentioning some similarities between the two authorities is that both European Aviation Safety Agency and Federal Aviation Administration are mandated with regulatory tasks in their respective locations (European Union Countries and the United States of America respectively) of operations. Some of the similar functions in regulatory responsibilities include regulation and monitoring of related environmental issues of civil aviation concerns (Wise, 2016).
Alternatively, both EASA & FAA are similar in that they are both tasked with the mandate of enhancing and operating air traffic controls for all flight operations for military and civilians. This also translates to the both aviation authorities having an upper hand in carrying and reporting on the investigations concerning the occurrences of the air accidents and aircraft crashes (Wise, 2016). Consequently, due to the sensitivity of the reports and information from the research findings on air accidents both authorities follow similar directives in their investigations and reporting.
For instance, EASA had to prohibit the flight operations of Dassault Falcon 7X jets through issuing an Emergency Airworthiness Directive. This was to serve as an interim measure awaiting the results of the research and investigations into incident confined by the manufacturer. Falcon 7X was involved in an uncontrolled pitch trim runaway (Oliveto, 2015). Fortunately, the experts were brave and intelligent enough to overturn the situation and stabilize the condition which in turn led to successful though uneventful landing. To prevent a similar occurrence in the future, EASA had to install some regulations to prohibit flight operations for the Jets. In the case of the same event in the US, similar directives will be given by the FAA to cut small operations of involved aircraft. In this case, the same task by both authorities is taken into consideration to curb further happenings hence regulating airworthiness of the travel aircraft.
Similarly, both aviation regulatory authorities in the capacity of EASA and FAA have to deal with the aspect of enhancing safety to minimize aircraft hazards. To achieve the goal of upgrading the safety standards, both agencies are tasked with setting up and formulating strict guidelines and regulations to stipulate how flights should be executed as well as skills and qualifications of the crew handling the aircraft. This being a very crucial aspect of the civil aviation, both authorities should be at par in as far as the setting guidelines are the concern. This will eventually streamline the flight operations and create a platform for calm activities (Wise, 2016).
Despite both EASA and FAA being regulatory authorities to guard and provide regulations with similar provisions, they also differ in other ways and modes of their operations as they execute their mandates. As a result of these ideologies, I would highlight some of the differences between the European Aviation Safety Agency and the Federal Aviation Administration. These differences will at first involve locality of their operations. EASA was mainly formed to focus purposely on regulating and monitoring flight operations and other civil aviation operations for the European Union countries. On the other hand, FAA was established as an aviation authority of United States of America mandated with developing and monitoring all aspects of civil aviation operations in the US (Oliveto, 2015).
Also, both EASA and FAA differ in respect to their modes and standards of their licensing policies and procedures. In this regard, EASA will only anticipate for the use digital avionics and up to date materials as opposed to the FAA approach in which the aviation technicians in the US will have to settle for the little-used methodologies and techniques that do not even recognize the existence of tech prevalence in the modern aircraft.
In conclusion, both European Aviation Authority and Federal Aviation Administration exhibit more similar aspects in their aspects of the regulatory and oversight responsibilities mandated to them in their respective locations of operations to regulate civil aviation sector. Despite all the same elements in their terms of office, both EASA and FAA differ significantly in their approaches and techniques of executing their mandates as well their licensing standardization

References
Oliveto, A. M. (2015). FAA vs. EASA: A Comparative Analysis of the Disciplinary Systems Applied in Aviation Law. Issues in Aviation Law and Policy, 15(1).
Wise, B. (2016). Safety Risk Management Principles from the Federal Aviation Administration. In Resident’s Handbook of Medical Quality and Safety (pp. 17-20). Springer International Publishing.