Author: Swiss Safety Investigation Board (SSIB)
Source: https://www.news.admin.ch/de/newnsb/vI-eF6xu0EGqlHXVepmrn
Publication date: 24 December 2025
Reading time: approx. 3 minutes
Executive Summary
The SSIB is introducing a prioritization system for safety investigations to address years of delays. Going forward, prevention potential will determine the scope of investigations and reports. This measure is intended to significantly improve the preventive impact of safety analyses and conclude procedures in a timely manner.
Critical Key Questions
- Transparency: How is "prevention potential" measured objectively and who decides on prioritization?
- Accountability: Is there a risk that less prominent accidents will be neglected?
- Freedom & Control: Does the new scaling continue to guarantee comprehensive investigations of all incidents?
- Innovation: Can standardized procedures (Art. 47 VSZV) be accelerated through agile methods?
- Trust: How does the SSIB communicate the reasons for case closures to those affected and the public?
Core Topic & Context
The SSIB, Switzerland's aviation safety investigation authority, suffers from a backlog problem: numerous investigations could not be completed for years, which reduced their preventive impact. The new strategy addresses this bottleneck through intelligent resource allocation.
Key Facts & Figures
- Three current notifications: HB-SGU (closure), D-6378/HB-OQB (factual report), HB-TDA (closure)
- New prioritization practice: Prevention potential as primary criterion
- Legal minimum standards: All accidents and serious incidents receive at least preliminary investigation and factual statement in the Prevention Bulletin
- ⚠️ Specific time targets or success metrics not mentioned
Stakeholders & Those Affected
| Group | Impact |
|---|---|
| Aviation industry | Faster closures, clear safety recommendations |
| Those affected by accidents | Transparency on prioritization criteria required |
| SSIB personnel | Resource optimization, but definition clarity needed |
| Regulators & politicians | More efficient prevention, risk of politicization |
Opportunities & Risks
| Opportunities | Risks |
|---|---|
| Timely closures increase prevention | Subjectivity in prevention potential assessment |
| Focus on high-impact measures | Less prominent cases could receive less attention |
| Resource efficiency and modernization | Loss of trust in "closures" without full investigation |
| Better safety culture through faster insights | ⚠️ Unclear criteria for factual statements |
Action Relevance for Decision-Makers
- Monitor: Publication of prioritization criteria and success metrics
- Demand: Transparency report on closure rates and their justification
- Require: Clear communication strategy for those affected by case closures
- Support: Resource allocation to the SSIB for consistent implementation
Scenario Analysis: Future Perspectives
| Time Horizon | Expected Development |
|---|---|
| Short-term (1 year) | First successes in closure rates; criticism of lack of transparency |
| Medium-term (5 years) | Established best-practice criteria; improvement in safety culture |
| Long-term (10–20 years) | International adoption of the model or decline due to over-regulation |
Quality Assurance & Fact-Checking
- [x] Central statements verified
- [x] Unconfirmed data marked with ⚠️
- [x] No contradictory information regarding publication date: 24.12.2025
- [ ] Operational success measurements missing – follow-up recommended
Supplementary Research
- SSIB website: www.sust.admin.ch – prioritization criteria and annual reports
- Swiss Federal Office of Civil Aviation (FOCA): Regulatory context
- International standards: ICAO Annex 13 and EU requirements for safety investigations
This text was created with the support of Claude Haiku.
Editorial responsibility: clarus.news | Fact-checking: 5 January 2025