As airlines around the world continue to cope with an increasingly complex security environment-from Eastern Europe to the Middle East and other regions plagued by instability-the International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations (IFALPA) has published a position paper of exceptional importance.
Its central message is both clear and unequivocal: the fact that flights continue to operate in conflict zones for months or even years without incident does not necessarily indicate that the level of risk has diminished. On the contrary, the authors warn, prolonged operations may create a dangerous illusion of safety.
The document, titled Human Performance Impacts of Civil Aviation Operations in Conflict Zones, does not focus on weapons systems, ballistic threats, or intelligence assessments. Instead, it concentrates on the human element-the pilots and flight crews themselves-and seeks to remind regulators and airlines that even in an era of advanced technology, people remain the most critical link in the safety chain.
According to IFALPA, any aviation activity conducted in a conflict zone must be regarded as an “exceptional operation,” regardless of how long such operations have been ongoing.
The federation argues that one of the most significant dangers is the gradual process known as the “normalization of risk,” whereby abnormal and potentially hazardous conditions slowly become accepted as part of routine operations.
The history of civil aviation demonstrates that organizations often become accustomed to risky situations when those conditions do not immediately result in safety events. Yet in many cases, the sense of security created by the absence of incidents can be deeply misleading.
In essence, the underlying message of the paper is simple: just because something has not happened yet does not mean it cannot happen tomorrow.
IFALPA emphasizes that operating in a conflict zone is fundamentally different from conducting a routine flight, even when the aircraft itself is not directly threatened.
Simply operating in an environment characterized by security risks, operational uncertainty, and constantly changing directives and flight routes creates a substantial cognitive burden on flight crews.
According to the authors of the document, this burden can degrade pilots’ situational awareness, complicate decision-making processes, and contribute to cumulative fatigue. In other words, even when an aircraft is fully serviceable and all systems are functioning normally, the level of stress imposed on crew members may affect performance in ways that are not always immediately visible.
One of the paper’s central themes concerns Fit-to-Fly standards.
The federation calls upon airlines to adopt a broader interpretation of the concept of fitness for duty-one that extends beyond the pilot’s physical condition alone. Alongside physical health, operators should also evaluate the mental and psychological state of crew members, particularly during prolonged periods of operations under exceptional conditions.
To support this approach, IFALPA recommends fostering an organizational culture in which pilots and other crew members can report excessive workload, burnout, or temporary unfitness without fear of professional or employment-related consequences.
The federation warns that concerns about financial, operational, or career implications may lead crew members to continue flying even when they are not performing at their best.
The document also places special emphasis on the authority of the aircraft commander.
It reiterates one of aviation’s fundamental principles: decisions concerning the safety and security of a flight rest solely with the captain.
According to IFALPA, those decisions must remain entirely free from commercial, operational, or organizational pressure.
This message takes on particular significance during periods when airlines operate in difficult economic environments and are forced to balance safety considerations against business demands.
The pilots’ federation seeks to remind industry that when flight safety is at stake, professional judgment must always take precedence over every other consideration.
Another major focus of the paper is Fatigue Risk Management.
IFALPA argues that existing regulatory requirements may not be sufficient when operations are conducted in conflict zones. Consequently, airlines are encouraged to adopt enhanced protective measures, including modified scheduling practices, augmented crew complements, and increased recovery periods between flight duties.
At the same time, the federation calls for an expansion of support systems available to flight crews.
The concept of Duty of Care, as defined in the document, extends beyond adequate physical rest. It also includes access to professional, confidential, and readily available psychological support services, as well as encouragement for crew members to seek assistance whenever necessary.
The paper further highlights the importance of maintaining professional training and recurrent instruction.
According to IFALPA, periods of prolonged operational stress are precisely the times when airlines must not compromise on training, refresher programs, and qualification requirements. These activities are an essential component of effective risk management and play a critical role in preserving operational resilience.
The federation’s bottom-line conclusion is straightforward yet powerful:
“Exceptional operations require exceptional safeguards.”
According to IFALPA, the passage of time does not reduce risk, and the absence of incidents does not eliminate the need for constant vigilance. Quite the opposite: the longer operations continue in conflict zones, the greater the need to resist the false sense of normalcy that can gradually develop around them.
For that reason, the International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations is urging airlines, operators, and civil aviation authorities worldwide to explicitly incorporate these recommendations into their policies and operational procedures.
In IFALPA’s view, protecting flight crews is not merely an employee welfare issue. It is a fundamental pillar of safeguarding the safety of civil aviation as a whole.
In an era when conflict zones are becoming a persistent reality across large parts of the world, IFALPA’s message is more relevant than ever:
The greatest threat is not always the missile that may suddenly appear on a radar screen. Sometimes it is the moment when the system itself stops recognizing risk as something exceptional-and begins treating it as routine.
Summary prepared by:
Guy Ben Gur and Jackie Limor
Members, IFALPA Human Performance Committee (HUPER)
