Aviation charter customers have many choices when it comes to picking an operator. The savvy ones research operators to find the best and safest fit for their trip, to ensure the safety of their employees, family, or friends.
Third-party audits, ratings, and certifications are widely used to establish a safety and quality standard for charter operators. In the past, many audits were simply a “paper chase” exercise. Today, most experts agree; a safety audit will validate an organization’s structure, ensure compliance with applicable regulations, and may even provide an opportunity for continuous improvement through mentoring and leadership training.
But here’s the rub: aviation is inherently dangerous, and there are charter operators that simply don’t make the grade. As demonstrated, in recent and past business aviation incidents and accidents, according to reports, some operators often had multiple top-level safety “designations” issued from different organizations—yet they still crashed.
Former NTSB Chairman Robert Sumwalt III called this an “illusion of safety” when a charter company uses these industry safety ratings in their marketing material. Sumwalt made these comments during a public hearing following the crash of a chartered Hawker 700A in Akron, Ohio, that killed nine people. The NTSB categorized this 2015 accident as “a disturbing accident after an unstable approach that raises serious questions about an operator’s procedures and culture.”
Sumwalt commented, “Finally, I’m concerned that an organization that had so many safety-related issues could have an Argus Gold rating and be Wyvern Registered. Discriminating customers look to, and trust, such ‘seals of approval’ when selecting their air travel provider.”
For the charter customer, how can you measure the safety of an aircraft operator? For a better understanding of third-party safety audits, ratings, and certifications, let’s learn more from a cast of air charter safety professionals.
Professional Safety Insights
Wyvern CEO Sonnie Bates has a long history of developing safety audits and leadership development programs for business aviation managers. He spent more than six years as an International Business Aviation Council (IBAC) director formulating and evolving the IS-BAO audit—a globally recognized audit standard.
According to Bates, “The standard of standards is ICAO Annex 6 Part 1. This is what the Part 121 carriers are held to. IATA further develops these standards to create the IOSA audit. IBAC aligns with ICAO Annex 6 Part 2 (Private Operations), but to a limited degree with Part 1, so not to offend and lose Part 91 private operators who do not want to be scrutinized to the level of a commercial operator.”
Bates is convinced that the real value and future of third-party engagement is in structured programs that provide ongoing coaching and leadership training. Bates provided some insight on audits at a basic level: “No audit or certification ‘ensures’ safety. However, they are an indication of commitment to a healthy safety culture. The most highly audited and monitored aviation system in the world (large Part 121 scheduled international air carriers) [can] still have accidents and serious incidents.”
JetChecked founder Mike Ruic believes that “these third-party certifications are not worthless, but they are far from a guarantee.” Ruic’s company provides safe and secure end-to-end private aviation services to high-net-worth individuals and Fortune 100 companies.
Ruic cites several recent examples, such as the 2021 crash of a Gulfstream IV in the Dominican Republic that killed nine people, including music producer Flow La Movie and his family. This charter operator held third-party safety certifications from two different companies. Ruic added, “Investigations revealed maintenance issues with the spoiler system, despite the flashy certifications on their website.”
In April 2025, a chartered Gulfstream V was destroyed in a runway incursion accident in Mexico. Fortunately, no lives were lost. What’s troubling, according to Ruic, was that “this operator had a troubling history with FAA civil penalties, unqualified pilots, and the accident pilot was once arrested with a blood alcohol level four times the legal limit.” According to the operator, at the time of the accident, it had the highest independent safety ratings from Argus, Wyvern, and IS-BAO.
Ruic hinted that there may be a better way. At JetChecked, “we only work with operators who treat these audits as a starting point, not the endgame. We dive into FAA enforcement histories, pilot qualifications, maintenance culture, and flight-by-flight vetting. That is where real safety lives, beyond the badge.”
Recently retired Air Charter Safety Foundation (ACSF) president Bryan Burns believes charter customers, due to recent high-profile accidents, are becoming more educated and are asking more pointed questions. Burns said, “They are much more aware and are now beginning to question charter operators about their internal safety programs, including safety audits.”
According to Burns, “the ACSF feels strongly that third-party audits offer several key benefits including an unbiased assessment, compliance verification, improved safety culture, operational efficiency, enhanced credibility, risk mitigation, and an assessment of a company’s emergency response plan.”
In addition, Burns said, “We are a big proponent of the ‘Pathway to Safety’ when it comes to small to medium-sized operators who typically lack time and resources to participate in various safety programs. Audits are just part of the process. Safety programs like Just Culture, SMS, ASAP, and FDM all complement one another when mitigating risk. If you think about it, it’s why airlines are considered the gold standard. They proactively participate in all these initiatives.”
Private Aviation Safety Alliance (PASA) president Jessie Naor is no stranger to business aviation and is passionate about aviation safety. In the past, she founded and served in several leadership roles at a large private jet and helicopter charter company and is now the host of “The VIP Seat” podcast.
Naor described a wide range of third-party audits. Breaking it down, she said, “It depends on the auditor. The lowest levels range from simply verifying the operator has a 135 certificate and no accident history in the last few years,” while cautioning that much is subject to the auditor’s discretion. She continues, “At the other end, there are onsite audits of the firms’ operations; some occur every two years, and some programs include quarterly reviews. While they don’t ensure safety, I would be much more trusting of an operator that agrees to quarterly programs that include onsite vetting.”
“If you’re going to be in the business of aviation, why wouldn’t you have a third party challenge your programs?” Naor says, “That’s what continuous improvement and dedication to safety is all about.”
Much of Naor’s focus is now on PASA, a non-profit organization committed to empowering consumers of private aviation with transparent, research-driven safety insights. Notably, PASA is completely unbiased, since it is the only nonprofit in the aviation safety space that operates without funding from the industry it oversees.
Naor says, “One of the reasons I founded PASA was to provide more transparency on accidents and incidents to consumers for free, so they can do their own research. The issue with auditing firms is that the financial incentives are misaligned; auditors need to pay the bills, and the only consistent source of revenue is from the operators; this creates a conflict of interest. There have been attempts in the past to have an independent audit standard, but they have failed, unfortunately.”
Illusion of Safety—Revisited
A decade has passed since former NTSB Chair Sumwalt made his “illusion of safety” comment at the Safety Board’s public hearing on the Hawker 700 crash in Akron, Ohio. Yet, according to KB Solutions CEO Kodey Bogart, that phrase is still very applicable to aviation safety and audits.
“While third-party audits and certifications are valuable tools, they can contribute to an ‘illusion of safety’ if not integrated into a broader, proactive safety culture,” said Bogart, a U.S. Army veteran, former Blackhawk medevac pilot, author, and doctoral candidate. “Relying solely on certifications without ongoing commitment to safety can lead to complacency, where the presence of a certificate is mistaken for actual safety performance.”
According to Bogart, “To avoid this pitfall, both operators and customers should view certifications as part of a comprehensive approach to safety, emphasizing continuous improvement, employee engagement, and a genuine commitment to safe operations.”
Bogart went on to share some experiences as an auditor. “While third-party audits aim to enhance safety, their ability to guarantee it is limited. Audits provide a snapshot of an operator’s compliance at a specific time but may not reflect ongoing practices or cultural attitudes towards safety.” She continued, “Moreover, the effectiveness of an audit depends on the rigor of the auditing process and the operator’s commitment to implementing recommended improvements. It’s important to note that while audits can identify areas for improvement, they do not replace the need for a proactive safety culture within the organization.”
Argus International v-p of business aviation audit programs, Patrick Chiles, provided some insight into the audit process. “Audits are a collaborative process between the operator and the audit organization,” he said. “To be truly effective, it must be more than just having the audit team show up with a blank checklist and getting to work. Pre-audit preparation is crucial, which means there is going to be some work on the operator’s part.”
Before Argus, Chiles held several management positions at a large fractional ownership company and Part 121 airlines. He added, “For every audit we perform, whether Argus, IS-BAO, ACSF, et cetera, the operator is provided with the checklists ahead of time. They are expected to go through each question and note where each one is addressed in their manual system. The operator then sends the completed checklist to the audit team along with copies of their manuals.”
This pre-audit work by the operator is critical, according to Chiles; “This is when the auditors get to work. They will go through each question and verify that the operator’s documented processes meet the intent of the standard. There are over four hundred individual questions in the Argus standard. Without the operator’s input, our auditors would have a considerably more difficult time preparing.”
He continued, “This prep work allows the audit team to arrive with a good understanding of the operation and what to focus on while onsite. The idea is to complete the documentation part of the audit ahead of time, so once onsite, the auditors can verify that all of the operator’s processes are being performed as documented. This is especially important because their time onsite is best spent interviewing the management team and other employees, reviewing records, inspecting aircraft and hangar spaces, and observing normal operations. This provides the auditors with a complete picture.”
Argus audits are a group effort, Chiles said. “Audit teams always consist of an operations auditor and a maintenance auditor. Our auditors have decades of experience as pilots, maintenance technicians, and licensed dispatchers. This experience is crucial for the judgment needed to interpret the standard and apply that to the operator’s programs.”
In addition to managing safety programs, Chiles is a certified auditor. He said, “Completing an Argus audit represents a commitment to safety and operating standards above and beyond the basic requirements of Part 135. This is important to recognize, because new entrants to the program often think they don’t have to conform to those items in the standard that aren’t strictly regulatory.” He continued, “Our audits aren’t a regulatory assessment; they’re designed to determine conformance to recognized industry best practices. For example, SMS has been a major focus of our audit programs long before the Part 5 mandate went into effect.”
Wyvern’s Bates explains that there is a wide variance in scope, depth, objectives, and outcomes of these industry safety audits. Bates said, as an example, “Wyvern is a deep dive versus a competitor’s shallow two-day touch and go. The idea of having hundreds of standards to cover in two days is not a good model,” Bates continued. “The evaluation should be risk-based. Wyvern focuses on Safety Culture Analysis and feedback, Human Performance Analysis and feedback, Flight Safety Foundation’s Basic Aviation Risks, SMS, Compliance management, and a discrete list of standards we feel are ‘killer items.’”
Bates believes an audit provides great value to the operator with a couple of caveats. “For the air charter operator, the regulators require them to have a basic and somewhat limited professional management structure, an SMS manual, an operations manual, an aircraft maintenance program manual, et cetera.” He continued, “So, these are the basic things that IS-BAO and Wyvern require as well. However, as indicated above, Wyvern deep dives into specific areas based on risk as identified by the industry.” As an example, Wyvern benchmarks against best practices and safety issues identified by the Flight Safety Foundation.
To keep operators honest, Bates feels that today’s best audit programs have advanced beyond simple “box ticking” exercises. “They are only as good as the effort they put into these programs. Operators tend to ‘slip’ back into ‘normal’ mode after the traditional audit, which is why Wyvern implemented the Flight Leader Program that requires quarterly monitoring and coaching to ensure continued alignment with best practices and professional codes of practice.”
Of importance, Bates added, “Wyvern also looks at the degree to which key personnel, pilots, and aircraft maintenance teams are dedicated to that operator versus freelance persons serving many operators.” This has been identified as a big risk in the air charter industry.
In fact, according to Bates, charter customers should pick only those operators that employ full-time dedicated management personnel in key roles such as director of operations, director of maintenance, and safety manager—this is considered a positive attribute.
Bates said there are many “red flags” to look out for when choosing a charter company. In addition to “freelance” personnel, Bates recommends at a minimum that the operator should hold at least one voluntary certificate, such as Wyvern Wingman, IS-BAO, or an ASCF audit. In addition, the operator should have an accountable executive who is available to talk about and promote the company’s safety culture. Bates also said customers should avoid flying on aircraft that are more than 20 years old or those operating with a single pilot.
JetChecked’s Ruic recommends avoiding operators that have a history of FAA violations. During his research, he found one operator that was fined for operating more than 1,000 flights without a qualified chief pilot and many others with maintenance violations for flying unairworthy aircraft. In addition, Ruic cautions customers to avoid those operators that “hide behind logos, badges, and marketing” or rely on contract pilots who may lack recent experience on the aircraft type.
Ruic has identified a few additional positive attributes of good charter operators. Ruic places emphasis on pilot training (using simulators), proficiency, and currency. Additionally, those operators should invest heavily in maintenance and should be willing to discuss past safety issues and corrective actions. Again, Ruic said, “Treat safety as a living, breathing commitment, not a marketing slogan.” He continued, saying, “That is why JetChecked does not believe in a one-time pass/fail sticker. We believe in constant, in-depth vetting so that every passenger can fly with the confidence that their operator is safe today, tomorrow, and always.”