pitotheat;
Thanks very much - we pointed that out years ago but in fact any flight operations management worth their pay would/should already know that fact - maybe they do, maybe they don't - I don't know.
We have a program in place, (a superb one - highly detailed and capable) but the other aspect of data collection is using it, presumably to advantage. I don't think it is too cynical to observe that the insurance company almost certainly doesn't know what is actually done with the data in fact, likely hasn't a clue what "FOQA/FDA" is or how it works. They just know what they hear (I doubt if they read) so, so long as the box is ticked which takes about 30 seconds from question to response in the forms, there may be a reduction in premiums. Someone from a suitable and knowledgeable insurance company involved in insuring airline assets can correct me (and I welcome such correction) but if they really know more than what I've said here, then they're not looking after their own risks very well and someone else is cheating. In fact we've been trying to get this program going for a decade now and it has been a tremendously tough, uphill battle with logs thrown in front of our horses at every turn, even today; when inconvenient, the data isn't believed and when it is, it's either a maintenance item or the exceedance(s) is/are "normalized" so it can be ignored. This issue is so pervasive as to be institutional rather than related to any one (or group) of individuals. I don't think the draw of cheaper premiums will resolve that issue.