22% of IATA Operational Safety Audit (IOSA) Standards Manual you already have
ISO/IEC 27011:2024 already covers about 22% of IATA Operational Safety Audit (IOSA) Standards Manual, leaving
7 of 9 controls as genuinely new work.
Already covered 2
Likely covered 0
New work 7
What is genuinely new work
Nothing in ISO/IEC 27011:2024 reaches these. This is the list to scope.
IATA-IOSA-Scope-Programme-Registry-RBI-AuditCycleIATA IOSA - Programme Scope + Registry + Audit Cycle + Risk-Based IOSA + Accredited Audit Organizations
IATA-IOSA-Section2-FLT-FlightOperationsIATA IOSA Section 2 - FLT Flight Operations + Flight Crew + Training + Operations Manual
IATA-IOSA-Section3-DSP-OperationalControl-FlightDispatchIATA IOSA Section 3 - DSP Operational Control + Flight Dispatch + Flight Watch + Crew Briefing
IATA-IOSA-Section4-MNT-AircraftEngineering-MaintenanceIATA IOSA Section 4 - MNT Aircraft Engineering and Maintenance + CAMO + Maintenance Programme + Records
IATA-IOSA-Section5-CAB-CabinOperationsIATA IOSA Section 5 - CAB Cabin Operations + Cabin Crew + Safety Procedures + Emergency Equipment
IATA-IOSA-Section6-GRH-GroundHandlingOperationsIATA IOSA Section 6 - GRH Ground Handling Operations + Aircraft Loading + Passenger + Ramp
IATA-IOSA-Section7-CGO-CargoOperationsIATA IOSA Section 7 - CGO Cargo Operations + Dangerous Goods + Cargo Security + Acceptance + Loading
Show the 2 you already have
IATA-IOSA-Section1-ORG-Organization-ManagementSystem-SMSIATA IOSA Section 1 - ORG Organization and Management System + Safety Management System (SMS) + Safety Policy + Hazard ID + Quality
IATA-IOSA-Section8-SEC-SecurityManagement-AVSECIATA IOSA Section 8 - SEC Security Management + Aviation Security Programme (AVSEC) + ICAO Annex 17 Alignment
How this is calculated
Already covered means a mapping runs from a control in ISO/IEC 27011:2024 to that control. Likely
covered means no direct mapping exists but both frameworks map to the same control in a third
standard. New work means neither. We keep those separate rather than adding them into one
friendlier number, because blending them would present a two-hop inference as a verified
fact.
Coverage is not symmetric.
Run it the other way and you will get a
different number; both are correct.
From 332,959 cross-framework control
mappings across 723 frameworks, 531 of them verified against
their source documents. It does not tell you that you are compliant: a mapped control means
the two standards ask for the same thing, not that you have done it.
Try another pair ยท
Today's edition