Aviation Anthology Vol 1 2026 - Digital Version - Flipbook - Page 24
The proposed amendments are set out in the CAA’s
Citizen Space consultation materials, supported by
a SkyWise alert.[7] The April 2026 draft reorganises
existing material and introduces structural changes, with
the result that it does not map directly onto CAP 790
Version 1. At this stage, the draft remains indicative only
and has no formal status until a revised CAP 790 (Version
2) is published. It is against that background that the key
features of the proposed amendments are considered in
this article.
From administrative control to active risk
management
The April 2026 draft introduces a series of substantive
amendments which, taken together, strengthen and
consolidate the ADP framework. In its consultation
materials, the CAA has made clear that the objective
is not to introduce a new regulatory regime, but rather
to improve the operation and effectiveness of existing
schemes. The proposed changes place less weight on
the one off grant of an Airside Driving Permit. Instead,
the draft focuses on the ongoing management of airside
driving risk in practice.
Where automation sits in the framework
CAP 790 does not apply to autonomous or semi
autonomous airside vehicles. That exclusion is
deliberate: CAP 790 is concerned with risk arising
from human-operated vehicles. The growing use of
automated and semi-automated ground support
vehicles raises a distinct set of issues around safety,
assurance and accountability that falls outside the scope
of CAP 790.
training and reassessment, particularly for drivers who
operate infrequently, perform specialist tasks, or use
complex ground support equipment.
This reflects established patterns in ground damage
claims, where incidents often involve experienced
personnel operating beyond the limits of recent
familiarity. From an underwriting perspective, how
effectively an organisation maintains and reviews
competence may serve as a useful indicator of risk.
Communication and human factors
Communication failures remain a recurrent contributory
factor in ramp incidents. The proposed update clarifies
expectations around radiotelephony competence and
language proficiency where those skills are safety critical.
In practical terms, this may influence liability assessments
where miscommunication is said to have contributed to
an incident, particularly in congested or time pressured
operating environments.
Records, audit and evidential clarity
A further theme of the proposed update is the
emphasis placed on record keeping and audit. The
draft underscores the importance of maintaining
comprehensive audit trails relating to training,
authorisation, and revalidation, including where those
functions are delivered through third party providers.
For claims practitioners, this is likely to be welcome.
Incomplete or poorly maintained records frequently
complicate claim investigations and introduce evidential
uncertainty. Improved documentation standards
should make it easier to establish whether regulatory
expectations have been met and, where they were not,
where deficiencies lie.
Clarifying roles and responsibilities
A notable feature of the draft is its clearer articulation
of responsibility between aerodrome operators,
employers, and drivers. Aerodrome operators are
expected to exercise more active oversight of ADP
arrangements, including the standards applied by third
party training and assessment providers. Employers are
expected to take clear responsibility for the competence
and conduct of their personnel. Drivers themselves
are reminded that holding an ADP carries personal
responsibility as well as operational privilege.
Runway incursion prevention and GAPPRI
alignment
From a liability perspective, this is likely to be of material
significance. Post incident disputes frequently turn
on questions of control and supervision. Clarity as
regards areas of responsibility may reduce the scope
for ambiguity when assessing where responsibility lay
and whether reasonable steps were taken to manage
foreseeable risk.
The proposed amendments promote entry onto
runways facing oncoming traffic where practicable,
improved visual checks prior to runway entry and
enhanced awareness of the operational environment.
The draft includes an expanded categorisation of
common incursion types alongside clearer articulation
of preventative measures. Taken together, the proposed
changes reflect an increasing focus on runway risk.
The Global Action Plan for the Prevention of Runway
Incursions (‘GAPPRI’) is an initiative led by the
International Civil Aviation Organisation (‘ICAO’), aimed
at reducing runway incursions through coordinated
action on training, procedures, communications, and
situational awareness.[8] The April 2026 draft embeds
GAPPRI principles, explicitly.
Competence, training and revalidation
The consultation places renewed emphasis on
competence as an ongoing requirement, rather than
assessment at the point at which a permit is granted.
The draft encourages a structured approach to refresher
24
DAC Beachcroft
Aviation Anthology 2026 - Volume I
