Hazard Identification
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: In the Auzzie outback
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hazard Identification
For those who are in the commercial aviation industry, what hazard identification methods are available for you to report hazards and which methods have you found to be most effective?
I'm only aware of the Flight Data Analysis Program(FDA), the Line Operations Safety Audit program(LOSA) and the Cabin Safety program.
I've heard some airlines some form of the British Airways Safety Information System(BASIS - www.winbasis.com)?
Sorry for the silly questions, just trying to gather some info about the real world for an assignment ;p
I'm only aware of the Flight Data Analysis Program(FDA), the Line Operations Safety Audit program(LOSA) and the Cabin Safety program.
I've heard some airlines some form of the British Airways Safety Information System(BASIS - www.winbasis.com)?
Sorry for the silly questions, just trying to gather some info about the real world for an assignment ;p
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: A oneworld lounge near you
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are many formal techniques available to fully qualified risk assessment professionals. These are not techniques that you can just pick up and use with no background or training in the subject area. If you do, and the documentation is pulled by an accident investigator (with skills in this area) or by the Police investigating a potential crime, then you might be in for a shock.
For example, you post starts with "hazard identification" and then goes on to "report hazards". These are completely separate areas. PM me for more real information. Oh, and I am professionally qualified in this area!
For example, you post starts with "hazard identification" and then goes on to "report hazards". These are completely separate areas. PM me for more real information. Oh, and I am professionally qualified in this area!
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: On a rolling stone
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
discountinvestigator is right on some points though I'm not sure what is meant by a "fully qualified risk assessment professional". That sounds like all those involved in hazard identification, for instance, need a Master degree in System Safety (which would be the closest thing to a "fully qualified risk assessment professional", as this would certainly not include someone who has undertaken a 1 or 2 week short course). Also once someone is qualified, that does not mean they are experienced enough.
I am also not sure whether not being a "fully qualified risk assessment professional" would really expose a person or an organisation to litigation! If this were the case then it would apply to almost all aviation organisations. I may be cynical but it is the kind of phrase that consultants use. The main thing is that as an organisation has taken reasonable care to ensure reasonable standards of hazard identification and risk assessment. There is no reason why this could not include self education with mentoring, as many short courses are in no way validated or properly assessed, and the 'qualifications' are not conferred by a University. You could start by reading this.
Also remember that hazid/risk assessment involves a lot of guess work/judgement (and a critical stage is very often omitted - [historical] hazard review). Many and incidents occur daily that were not predicted in risk assessments, even those who are highly experienced and have formal qualifications. It is no panacea.
I am also not sure whether not being a "fully qualified risk assessment professional" would really expose a person or an organisation to litigation! If this were the case then it would apply to almost all aviation organisations. I may be cynical but it is the kind of phrase that consultants use. The main thing is that as an organisation has taken reasonable care to ensure reasonable standards of hazard identification and risk assessment. There is no reason why this could not include self education with mentoring, as many short courses are in no way validated or properly assessed, and the 'qualifications' are not conferred by a University. You could start by reading this.
Also remember that hazid/risk assessment involves a lot of guess work/judgement (and a critical stage is very often omitted - [historical] hazard review). Many and incidents occur daily that were not predicted in risk assessments, even those who are highly experienced and have formal qualifications. It is no panacea.
Last edited by HigherSights; 4th Apr 2009 at 03:53.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Someday land
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have a look at the ICAO Safety Management Manual (ICAO doc 9859), it gives a good overview of the basic tools used in aviation safety.
http://www.icao.int/fsix/_Library/SMM-9859_1ed_en.pdf
There are several methods, each has a particular usefulness to detect a certain type of information, some of the obvious ones:
- Air safety Reporting by frontline staff (WinBASIS or its successor Sentinel, are just databases which allow to store and analyse safety reports to detect safety trends, there are many others available), ASR systems provide sometimes high quality information on the why of some events, however the quantity is dependant on the willingness (and opportunities) of staff to report. It can be dodgy basing statistical analysis on ASR's.
- Flight data monitoring (provides a wealth of statistical data on a limited scope of in-flight parameters, which gives some info on how the aircraft is operated, but not why it is operated like that)
- Surveys (can give insight in attitudes of operators, but can't be treated as facts, more as an opinion poll)
- Line Operations Safety Audits (LOSA) (again a lot of statistical data on a limited field (TEM performance by pilots)
Each tool has its limitations, the more tools applied the more diverse viewpoints become available and a more complete image of the safety background becomes available. Keep in mind that all these hazard identification tools have their specific limitations!
http://www.icao.int/fsix/_Library/SMM-9859_1ed_en.pdf
There are several methods, each has a particular usefulness to detect a certain type of information, some of the obvious ones:
- Air safety Reporting by frontline staff (WinBASIS or its successor Sentinel, are just databases which allow to store and analyse safety reports to detect safety trends, there are many others available), ASR systems provide sometimes high quality information on the why of some events, however the quantity is dependant on the willingness (and opportunities) of staff to report. It can be dodgy basing statistical analysis on ASR's.
- Flight data monitoring (provides a wealth of statistical data on a limited scope of in-flight parameters, which gives some info on how the aircraft is operated, but not why it is operated like that)
- Surveys (can give insight in attitudes of operators, but can't be treated as facts, more as an opinion poll)
- Line Operations Safety Audits (LOSA) (again a lot of statistical data on a limited field (TEM performance by pilots)
Each tool has its limitations, the more tools applied the more diverse viewpoints become available and a more complete image of the safety background becomes available. Keep in mind that all these hazard identification tools have their specific limitations!
