Hi
RR_NDB;
None of this is "new". Flight data analysis and monitoring has been around for fifty to sixty years at BOAC/BA. The rest of the industry began getting on board in the '70's. Some just don't get it and don't implement it for some strange reason but in this day and age of cheap equipment, massive processing and storage capacity and the ability to "know" vice "not know" and the notion of the accountable executive, there simply is no excuse for a major carrier to resist or ignore such programs. But believe me, it happens and all kinds of excuses are given. It is complex, takes a very long time to design, create and implement and for those who like to think that their operation is "pretty good" it is an unwelcome and difficult wake-up call to accept. No carrier is immune and no management has the right to think that they don't have such events occurring on a regular basis.
Air France was a very early entrant and user of FDM and they run a good program from the information and presentations I have seen them create.
The notion of the "gatekeeper" is equally not new. The data process tells us "what", but not "why" something out of the ordinary occurred on a particular flight.
FDM data is trended, graphed and presented to Flight Ops managements, (de-identified) and other stakeholders including the pilots' association.
Gatekeeper contact, once established and trusted, is an extremely valuable process which puts pilot association member, the pilot(s) and the data together in a confidential private process of discussion. Such discussions may be straightforward or may be quite detailed depending upon the event. In almost all initial contacts the captain is contacted first. Very often the response is relief and a willingness to be a partner in finding out what occurred and trying to improve those areas which were felt to be contributing factors.
It may be appreciated that this is no ordinary conversation. It requires great comprehension on the part of the pilot association FDM representative and also requires great confidence in such a system by those so contacted, and it further challenges the Operations people to trust that such a process is being done and is providing through appropriate channels the necessary and timely feedback to address problems where they may have emerged in the data. This involves the training/checking process as well as the SOP and policy documents.
FDM people also keep an eye on the industry. Sometimes an occurrence is not monitored such as "split thrust levers at landing", (a result of the TAM accident), and a new FDM "event" is created; all of a sudden an airline learns something new about its operation where it was "blind" before.
For those who want to know more about this safety tool, try
CAP 739,
FAA FOQA, and the Flight Safety Foundation for starters.