data driven safety
DESCRIPTION
Data Driven Safety. X-15 Simulator. X-15 Simulator Use. Time honored criteria to predict aircraft behavior failed to uncover serious threats Pilot controlled flight-simulation device developed to aid research Researchers could now simulate and analyze hazardous conditions at a lower risk - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Data Driven SafetyData Driven Safety
X-15 SimulatorX-15 Simulator
X-15 Simulator UseX-15 Simulator Use
• Time honored criteria to predict aircraft behavior failed to uncover serious threats
• Pilot controlled flight-simulation device developed to aid research
• Researchers could now simulate and analyze hazardous conditions at a lower risk
• Unknown hazards of controlling X-15 flight explored before flight – 10 hours simulation for 1 hour of flight
• The application of X-15 simulation techniques to other aerospace applications was an unforeseen data-information-knowledge safety benefit of that program
Flight Data RecordersFlight Data Recorders
Commercial Aviation Safety Analysis Commercial Aviation Safety Analysis Of DataOf Data
• Evolved from research programs in the 1950’s• Metal strip scribed with basic parameters
– Heading / Time / Airspeed / Altitude
• In 1958 the Civil Aeronautics Administration mandated use in commercial aircraft
• By 1980’s second generation digital recorders were mandated which captured 11 parameters for up to 25 hours of recording time– Pitch / Roll / Vert & Long Accels / Thrust / Controls /
Radio transmission
The 1960’s Marked the Beginning of The 1960’s Marked the Beginning of Significant Improvements in Aviation SafetySignificant Improvements in Aviation Safety
05/16/2002 FT-004Wc
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Hull loss accidentsper year*
Hull loss accident rate*[Accidents per million departures]
Departures, Millions*
Reductions possible with continued Industry effort
*Accident and Departure data through 31 December 2001
Data Collection & Analysis Data Collection & Analysis
• Digital Flight Data Recorders– DFDR (Black Box)
– Modern equipment has several hundred recorded discrete parameters
• Post accident investigations able to more accurately identify cause – Challenged to maintain hazard identification focus
versus establishing blame
• Aviation safety recorded remarkably improved
Flight Operations Quality AssuranceFlight Operations Quality Assurance
• Systematic analysis of routine data
• Thousands of hours of recorded data reduced to distribution graphs
• Safety departments can focus on most critical information that exceeds some predetermined value
Digital Flight Data RecorderDigital Flight Data Recorder
Routine Download and AnalysisRoutine Download and AnalysisData – Information - KnowledgeData – Information - Knowledge
• European community has employed this for over 30 years
• U.S. just now implementing– Litigious society turns safety information into a liability– Non-punitive policy is imperative to success– Objective is to identify trends – not individuals
• Cooperative efforts of 3 main parties necessary– Industry / Company– Regulators– Labor
• Positive results already realized
Computer Technology Enhances Safety
• Digital Flight Data Acquisition Units – DFDAU– Thousands of information sources can report to a
central recording unit
• Quick Access Recorders – QAR– Ease of access to data stream
• Purpose of Program is to:– Detect latent patterns of behavior in human
performance – Weaknesses in the aviation system supporting
infrastructure– Anomalies in aircraft performance
New Focus on the HazardNew Focus on the Hazard
• Thousands of hours of data reduced to distribution charts (Information)
• Adverse systemic trends now addressed as root cause versus human failings (Knowledge)
• Leading Indicators in trend data are point of focus versus accident investigation (Data Mining)
• Safety departments can identify trends and lead decision makers to address highest threat (Proactive vs. Reactive)
Worldwide and U. S. Airline FatalitiesClassified by Accident Type – 1992 through 2001
Total Worldwide Fatalities - 6,926
Worldwide
U. S. Operators
CFIT and Loss of Control Fatalities Worldwide = 4,523 or 65%
6/10/02 AT-002
WW number offatal accidents(112 total)
U.S. Operators(22 total)
2731 22 2 3 2 2 817 83
1382CA
989CC
212
CFITLoss ofcontrolin flight
In-flightfire
Mid-air
collision
Fueltank
explosion
Takeoffconfig.
Wind-shear
Fuelexhaus-
tion
Landing RunwayIncursion
Un-known
Ice/snow
Turbu-lence
RTOMisc.fatality
CFIT = Controlled Flight Into TerrainRTO = Refused TakeoffLoss of Control: CA = Control Available; CC = Control Compromised
Note: • Accidents involving multiple, non-onboard fatalities are included.• Accidents involving single, non-onboard fatalities are excluded.• Western-built commercial transports > 60,000 lbs.• Hijack and Sabotage events are excluded
17 10 1 1 1 1 43 01 100
Nu
mb
er o
f F
atal
itie
s
Data Driven Safety SummaryData Driven Safety Summary• Safety departments generally seen by accountants
as not contributing to profitability – Safety as a Cost Center
• Powerful new tools allow safety departments to statistically predict where the next high cost accident will happen
• Limited resources are focused on the most significant hazards
• Reductions in maintenance, operating, and training costs realized – Safety as a Profit Center