FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 1 FAST European Commercial Aviation Safety Team (ECAST) Future Aviation Safety Team (FAST) Generic Presentation – “Draft”March 2007 A European Safety Strategy Initiative (ESSI)
Dec 15, 2015
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 1
FASTFAST
European Commercial Aviation Safety Team (ECAST)
Future Aviation Safety Team (FAST)Generic Presentation – “Draft”March 2007
A European Safety Strategy Initiative (ESSI)
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 2
FASTFAST
PURPOSE
• Explanation – JSSI/ESSI/ECAST context– What is FAST?– What it’s not…
• Present “FAST Method”
• Provide overview of process & results
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 3
FASTFASTEXPLANATION
• HISTORY - JSSI TERMS OF REFERENCE• FOCUS AREAS• HAZARD IDENTIFICATION• RISK MANAGEMENT MODEL• FAST CHARTER• ESSI/ECAST IS SUCESSOR OF JSSI• SUMMARY OF FAST PRODUCTS• PROBLEM APPOACH• FUTURE AREAS OF CHANGE• WHAT THE FAST IS AND IS NOT…
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 4
FASTFAST
HISTORY – JSSI Terms of Reference• Reduce the annual number of
accidents and fatalities in each JAA member state and its operators irrespective of the growth in air traffic
• Focused safety agenda with deliverables
• Partnership + cooperation + communication + implementation
• Structured complementary approaches, leading for:– Historic FAA/CAST– Prognostic JAA/JSSI
Reference JAA website http://www.jaa.nl/jssi/profile.html
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 5
FASTFASTFOCUS AREAS
CAST
Uncontained Engine Failures Turbulence
COMMON JSSI - CAST Controlled Flight into Terrain
Approach & Landing
Loss of Control Weather Runway incursions
75% of all commercial aviation accidents 1994-2003
JSSI• Design Related
• Future Aviation Safety
• Occupant Safety & Survivability
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 6
FASTFASTHAZARD IDENTIFICATIONHAZARD IDENTIFICATION
•Historic & current operational data exist
•Expertise and experience exist•Current analysis tools can:
– Identify hazards– Define their causal factors– Establish frequencies (risk)– Provide learning
•Establishes the baseline•Provides validation for predictive risk assessment techniques
•No operational data exist, but conclusions can be drawn from current & future trends
•No experts or experience exist but domain experts know “what keeps them up at night”
•Qualitative hazard identification:– Predict likely hazards– Identify possible causal
factors•Quantitative risk assessment adds:
– Refinement of probable causal factors & estimate of frequencies
– Bases for focused studies using computational & human-in-the-loop simulations
Retrospective(Historic & Diagnostic)
Predictive(Prognostic - FAST)
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 7
FASTFAST
Strategic Use
Heterogeneous INCIDENT & OPERATIONAL DATA
Monitor, codify, classify, & merge
Identify Patterns
Statistical & CausalAnalysis
Convert to Information
Evaluate frequency & severity
INTERVENTION&INNOVATION - Design - Operations - Investment - etc.
HIS
TO
RIC
FE
ED
BA
CK
LO
OP
RISK MANAGEMENT MODEL SUGGESTED BY FAST
Heterogeneous ACCIDENT DATA
Gather, codify, classify, & merge
Identify Events
Historic & CausalAnalysis
Convert to Information
Determine contributing factors & severity
DIA
GN
OS
TIC
FE
ED
BA
CK
LO
OP
PR
OG
NO
ST
IC “
FU
TU
RE
S”
FE
ED
BA
CK
LO
OP
Systematic measurement, hazard
qualification & quantification and/or
scenario-specific Monte Carlo simulations
Prediction &Refined Causal
Analyses RAPID RESPONSE
TacticalUse
Codify, classify, & merge
Identify Trends
Future HazardAnalysis
Convert to Information
Predict domains& severity
FUTURE CHANGES
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 8
FASTFASTFAST Charter
Vision • Identify possible future hazards to the safety of aviation in
order to prevent those hazards from appearing within the future aviation system.
Mission• Enable individuals or organizations and in particular the
ESSI/ECAST, to evaluate proposed changes to the aviation system, identify hazards that may be created by such changes and by interaction effects, and subsequently develop mitigating actions.
Goal• To prevent aviation accidents by eliminating or mitigating
future hazards.
European Aviation Safety Agency
January 31, 2007
ESSI by EASA has succeededto JSSI by JAA
During the JAA – EASA transition, EASA has begun to build up the European Strategic Safety Initiative (ESSI) in 2005
ESSI foundation meeting took place on April 27 2006 and the JSSI-ESSI handover was performed on June 28 2006
European Aviation Safety Agency
January 31, 2007
The 3 ESSI Pillars
3 pillarsCommercial Aviation (ECAST)
Working with CAST Partnership
Rotorcraft (EHEST) Working in IHST Partnership
General Aviation (EGAST) Safety Committee Promotion
Consistent approach to safety risk management
European Aviation Safety Agency
January 31, 2007
ESSI / ECAST Construction
27 April 2006Foundation group: Bring the parties together
13 July 2006Making a charter
12 October 2006Agree foundation documents
13 & 14 December 2006Establishing a work programme
FAST reconducted as a Working Group of ECAST
2007Full schedule of activities
European Aviation Safety Agency
January 31, 2007
Where FAST fits in ESSI
COORDINATION GROUP
ECASTCOMMERCIAL AVIATION
SAFETY TEAM
EHESTHELICOPTER SAFETY
TEAM
EGESTGENERAL AVIATION
SAFETY TEAM
FAST WORKING GROUPS
WORKING GROUPS
Open and Closed Forums
Other WORKING GROUPS
European Aviation Safety Agency
January 31, 2007
1. Assess and Prioritise Accident Risks and Causal factors in Europe (yearly revised)
COM
M UNICATION
COORDINATION
Mid Term Programme Review - 2012
2. Identify and Review Safety Programmes
3. Define Safety Performance Metrics
4. Define Safety Enhancement Objectives
5. Institute Safety Programmes
6. Make Recommendations for Safety Enhancements
7. Perform Costs Benefits Analysis
8. Develop Action Plans
9. Implement Action Plans and Monitor Implementation
10. Monitor Action Plans Efficacy to Achieve Safety Objectives
ECAST Process
Main FAST Input: Top Emerging and Future risks
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 14
FASTFASTFAST Summary of Results
• A structured methodology incorporated into a formal handbook.
• A prioritized list of Areas of Change [AoC].
• Two applications/tests of the methodology:– Recommendations resulting from the study of the AOC “Increasing
Crew Reliance on Cockpit Automation”, e.g. related to the Air Ground Space System [AGS]
– Results from the study of future hazards generated by the concept of operations for 2011developed by EUROCONTROL.
• A FAST website
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 15
FASTFASTPROBLEM APPROACH
Does it exist yet?
Has it caused
an accident? Is it known?DiscoveryProcesses
InterventionProcesses
Prognostic Design of new Aviation System components or practices p
reve
nts
Historic e.g. Accident Investigation d
isco
vers
Diagnostic e.g. ASAP, COSP,
ISDSR, LOSA, FOQA, ISDSR,
ASRS, SRB. ECCAIRS, ODA
etc.
dis
cove
rs
Prognostice.g. Emergent,
FAST, etc.
dis
cove
rs
Diagnostic
pre
ven
ts
informs intervention
informs intervention
0 0 0
0 0 1
1 0 0
1 0 1
informs intervention
1 1 1
e.g. Regulation, Product Improvement, CAST, ECAST, company safety (e.g. SRP) processes, FSF/ALAR tool kit, Human factors tool kit etc.
Historic
more
accidents
pre
ven
ts
1 1 0
1 = yes, 0 = no
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 16
FASTFASTFUTURE AREAS OF CHANGE
NOW 2010 2015 2020Past
AoC a phase out of Gen I transports
AoC c
AoC b
AoC d
AoC g
AoC j
advent of very-light jets AoC l
AoC h
AoC eAoC f
AoC i
AoC k
t
Spe
ctru
m a
nd M
agni
tude
of
Are
as o
f C
hang
e A
ffec
ting
the
Fut
ure
Avi
atio
n S
yste
m
Introduction of UAV’s
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 17
FASTFASTIMPORTANCE OF IDENTIFYINGAREAS OF CHANGE…The future is not necessarily a direct extrapolation of the past.
Present and near-term safety interventions that are intended to prevent future accidents caused by previously known hazards may not be enough to prevent new types of accidents from happening in the future.
A mid-1990’s study by a major manufacturer looked at accidents in which airplane systems were involved in an accident or where they could have prevented the event and did not. It was found that in approximately 70% of the accidents involving airplane systems, the original design assumptions were inadequate for the situation existing at the time of the accident due to changes in…
- the aviation system- airplane operational usage- personnel demographics- evolving infrastructure or other considerations.
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 18
FASTFASTCHANGING NATURE OF ACCIDENTS
“Technological innovations are changing both aircraft and the airspace in which they operate. Cumulatively, these technological changes aim to increase reliability throughout the aviation system and vastly improve safety in the skies. These changes include systems designed to move aircraft more efficiently in the air and on the ground, methods for providing pilots and ground controllers with better information about traffic and weather conditions, and improvements in aircraft components and design.
“The growth in aircraft system complexity is exponential in many areas, with the most significant trend being the inter-connectedness of systems. Current-generation aircraft operate as highly integrated systems with extensive cross-linking. As system complexity grows, so does the concern about hidden design flaws or possible equipment defects.
“Accidents involving complex systems and events present investigators with new and different failure modes that multiply the number of potential scenarios they must consider. The historically common causes of accidents are occurring less frequently, leaving more challenging accidents to diagnose.” *
* - Safety in the Skies Personnel and Parties in NTSB Aviation Accident Investigations-Master Volume, Chapter Three: Emerging Aviation Trends: Potential Impact on Aircraft Accident Investigations, By: Liam P. Sarsfield, William Stanley, Cynthia C. Lebow, Emile Ettedgui, Garth Henning, published in 2000
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 19
FASTFASTAreas of Change: Some Principles
• Changes must be understood as broadly as possible.
• To bring consistency and coherence to the process, Areas of Change are grouped by categories.
• The diagram on the next sheet illustrates the eleven broad categories of Areas of Change affecting aviation identified by the FAST
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 20
FASTFASTFAST AREAS OF CHANGE CATEGORIES
Count Category
29 Aircraft
11 Maintenance, Repairs, Overhaul
19 Operations
21 Crew
7 Passenger
10 Organization
12 Authority
22 Air Navigation System
7 Airport
35 Environment
5 Space Operations
___
179 Total Areas of Change
as of 24 February 2006
GLOBALAVIATIONSYSTEM
AIRCRAFT
MAINTENANCE,REPAIRS,
OVERHAUL
OPERATIONS
CREW
PASSENGER
ORGANIZATIONAUTHORITY
AIRNAVIGATION
SYSTEM
AIRPORT
ENVIRONMENT
SPACEOPERATIONS
The FAST continuously solicits submission of new, candidate AoC’s via the process shown in Backup Charts.
Submissions should be made to Rudi den Hertog, Chief Engineer, Fokker Services, FAST Co-chair, [email protected]
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 21
FASTFASTWhat is an Area of Change• The Global Aviation System (GAS) is in fact a "system of
systems." • Examples of "systems" include
– airplanes, – air traffic control systems, – company processes, and – regulatory systems.
• The future GAS will be fundamentally different than what exists today because changes affecting the GAS will continuously occur as the system evolves into the future.
• The ongoing process of change including both evolutionary and sudden, disruptive events or paradigm shifts must be considered for effective safety risk management.
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 22
FASTFAST
2020 situation2020 situation•Integrated Air Ground Space System • Operates during all phases of flight • Communicates through data link
Civil aerospace challengesCivil aerospace challenges•Increased aerospace capacity • Better respect of the environment (“sustainable growth” approach)• improved safety
Air Ground Space System
Distributed multi agent systemDistributed multi agent system•Free routing/free flight•New airspace classification•4-D dimensional trajectories
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 23
FASTFASTImportance• It is important that aviation practitioners who are
designing future systems have foreknowledge of potential future hazards.
• A change to any one system could affect other systems. Interactions of future changes to several systems could likewise affect the whole.
• These changes could have adverse impacts on the safety of the Global Aviation System.
• The goal of "discovering" future hazards is to eliminate, avoid or mitigate hazards in the future that may arise as a result of the changes. This will reduce the risk of future incidents and accidents.
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 24
FASTFAST
WHAT’S FAST?
• OBJECTIVES
• WHAT’S SO SPECIAL?
• WHAT FAST IS AND WHAT NOT
• COMPOSITION
• CORE TEAM
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 25
FASTFAST
OBJECTIVES of the FAST method
Studying potential future changes in the Aerospace System in order to :• Identify relevant Areas of Change [AoC] either within or
external to the aviation system• Identify Hazards, both inherent to the AoC as well as
those arising from interaction with other AoC’s• Develop recommendations to eliminate hazards or
mitigate their effects, such as:• Tools to analyze and mitigate the hazards including studies
and simulations to quantify the risks of identified hazards• Providing probable hazard information to influence entities that
shape the future
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 26
FASTFAST
DISTINCTIVE CHARACTERISTICS
• Concept of considering a comprehensive set of “Areas of Change” affecting aviation safety
• Using a broad representation of domain experts representing diverse affected organizations within an Expert Team hazard-discovery setting looking for direct and indirect hazards
• Direct- as well as Indirect hazard(s) identification, with indirect hazards resulting from interaction among AoC’s within a novel future operational scenario - identifies hazard catalysts not ammenable to computational modeling
• Maintaining and providing to the aviation community an up-to-date repository of AoC’s, possible aviation futures, Technology Watch Items & hazards.
• Offering a Future Hazard Analysis method that can be used universally by any organization
• Having a FAST Core Team ready to assist Customers using its Future Hazard Analysis method
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 27
FASTFASTWhat the FAST is and is not…
The FAST process is a systematic approach to identification of:– Wide range of changes affecting aviation safety (AoC’s)– Systemic vulnerabilities and hazards within highly integrated systems – Boundary aspects not only within aviation but external to it that may
be the catalysts for future hazards including common cause factors and interactions
The FAST process is not a risk assessment method - that is, it doesn’t estimate relative frequency of hazards.
The FAST generally does not recommend or develop safety interventions - FAST can feed Risk Assessment and RiskManagement processes in which safety interventions are developed and implemented, and action efficacy is monitored. These are best left to the customers.
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 28
FASTFAST
COMPOSITION
• MEMBERS from
DGAC, CAA-UK, CAA-NL, ENAC, EASA,
Civil Aircraft Inspection Board of Poland,
ASD, EC/Joint Research Centre, EUROCONTROL,
ERA/EASYJET, IFALPA/SAS Norway, IAPA, IFA, Air Transport Association of Canada, NASA
Airbus, Boeing, Bombardier, Fokker, Rockwell Collins• CORE TEAM is driving force, meeting approximately
quarterly
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 29
FASTFAST
FAST METHOD
• DEFINITIONS– CUSTOMERS– STAKEHOLDERS– EXPERT TEAMS– TECHNOLOGY WATCH ITEMS
• PROCESS FLOWS
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 30
FASTFASTDEFINITIONS:CUSTOMERSCUSTOMERS are organizations that have are organizations that have
authority to either recommend or implement authority to either recommend or implement changes to the Global Aviation System changes to the Global Aviation System
STAKEHOLDERSSTAKEHOLDERS are organizations that may are organizations that may be impacted by an envisioned change to the be impacted by an envisioned change to the Global Aviation SystemGlobal Aviation System
EXPERT TEAM
• Drawn from Customer & Stakeholder organizations
• Selected by FAST and Customer collaboratively based on the envisioned future being considered
• Must have specific expertise associated with the future being evaluated
• No experience with FAST method required
initiate changesinitiate changes
affected by changesaffected by changes
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 31
FASTFASTDEFINITIONS, cont.
TECHNOLOGY WATCH ITEMS• A repository of tell-tale advances in technology and other relevant
factors that may indicate which possible aviation future is unfolding and thereby signal if postulated direct hazards and/or indirect hazards (interaction hazards) are coming about.
• To be revisited after significant events (incidents & accidents) and be part of risk assessment plans.
• Maintained for the benefit of the worldwide aviation community similar to the CAST Problem Statements.
FA
ST
Cor
e T
eam
R
espo
nsib
ility
Commission Expert Teams
Advocate the FAST Philosophy
Guide FAST Facilitators
Cus
tom
er/
Sta
keho
lder
R
espo
nsib
ility
Exp
ert
Tea
m
Res
pons
ibili
ty
Enhance the FAST Method
3. Assemble an Expert
Team
1.Responsible Party Proposes Change(s) to Global Aviation System; recognizes need for
systematic prediction of hazard(s) associated with
changes and need to design potential hazards out of system or avoid or mitigate hazard(s)
4.Understand Customer
Requirements and Future of Interest
10.Inform FAST &
Customers Regarding results
2.Define Scope of
Expert Team Hazard-
IdentificationStudy
9.Formulate
Recommendations& Identify Watch
Items
8. (optional)Identify Mitigations & Effects of Areas of
Change on Mitigations
7.Enrich Hazards by
Evaluating Interactions with Areas of Change
5. (optional)Identify Intrinsic Hazards Within
Future of Interest
6.Identify Areas of
Change Pertinent to Future of Interest
Enhance and/orModify Planned
Changes
Maintain Futures &
Watch Items
Maintain Areasof ChangeRepository
FAST Methodology / Process
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 33
FASTFAST
OVERVIEW of PROCESS & RESULTS
Work progressed in phases:
– Phase I (Oct/99-Sep/00): Established methodology, identified 157 changes affecting the aviation system.
– Phase II (Nov/00-July/01): Prioritised Areas of Change
– Phase III (Oct/01-Jan/04): Analysed highest priority Area of Change: Increasing Reliance on Flight Deck Automation
– Phase IV (Feb 05-Mar06) : Re-check/update AoC list, develop Process Handbook/Generic Presentation/Public Website,
– Phase V (Mar 06-July 06: ConOps 2011 analysis [ANS-1].
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 34
FASTFAST
OVERVIEW OF RESULTS
• TOP 4 AREAS OF CHANGE• SYNTHESIS FROM TOP 20 AoC• PHASE III OUTPUT• ConOps 2011 [ANS-1] ANALYSIS
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 35
FASTFAST
TOP 4 AREAS OF CHANGE
PRIORITISED & CATEGORIZED FROM CURRENT LIST OF 179
• Increasing Crew Reliance on Flight Deck Automation (Aircraft)
• Emergence of New Concepts for Airspace Management (Air
Navigation System)
• Introduction of New Technologies with Unforeseen Human Factors
Aspects (Crew)
• Proliferation of Heterogeneous Aircraft with Widely-varying
Equipment and Capabilities (Aircraft)
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 36
FASTFAST
SYNTHESIS FROM TOP 20 AREAS OF CHANGE
1. Introduction of new air, ground, and satellite-based automated systems
2. Increased heterogeneity of: aircraft types & flight capabilities, equipage & software, airspace utilization approaches, and development directions & timelines for airborne, ground, and space-based aviation support systems
3. Increase in absolute numbers of aviation operations and corresponding reduction in safety margins as a result of: increased demand, decreased separation and more frequent operation in or near adverse weather conditions
4. Ensuring adequate maintenance of air- and ground-based systems in an environment of increased outsourcing of work, increased complexity of hardware, firmware & software, and a shortage of qualified maintenance personnel
Common threads as they appeared within the 2001 top 20 AoC synthesis.
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 37
FASTFASTPHASE III OUTPUT
Analysis of highest priority AoC: Increasing Crew Reliance on Flight Deck Automation:
– Identification/prioritisation of hazards
– Development and prioritisation of recommendations addressing most important hazards
– Introduction of Technology Watch Items
– Present the methodology used and lessons-learned
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 38
FASTFASTConOps is the Eurocontrol
Concept of Operation for 2011FAST was tasked to identify
future hazards in ConOps
Two workshops held (6-9 June and 17-20 July 2006) with European and US experts
Eurocontrol’s FAST – ConOps Workshops
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 39
FASTFASTCONOPS 2011 - CONTENT
Concept of Operations 2011 Description of the ATM System in 2011 - the Main Changes
The ATM Components, OI’s and System Enablers The ATM Operational Model
The Key Enablers – SWIM, the Network Operations Plan and Collaborative Decision Making
The Principles of the Layered Planning ProcessHigh-Level System Capabilities
Business Impact Statements
AnnexesThe Actors – Roles and Responsibilities Operational Scenarios and Use cases
Air Traffic Flow &
CapacityManagement
Airspace Organisation &Management
Airspace User
Operations
Airport Operations
Information Management &
Services
Separation Assurance
Synchronisation
FASTFAST
FAST – ConOps Evaluation: From EUROCONTROL final comments
Lessons learned Very useful exercise Hazards identified may allow improving ConOps Pass results to SESAR, maybe a FAST customer FAST methodology requires further development
Subsequent development FAST Handbook upgraded Clarification of AoC use for:
Hazard Identification / EnrichmentMitigations
Link to classical Risk Assessment Methods Transferable methodology
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 41
FASTFAST
http://fast.jrc.it/Under development
http://fast.jrc.ec.europa.eu/Final URL
FAST Website
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 42
FASTFAST
An essential element of a safety strategy
Future hazards can not be entirely extrapolated from the past
There is a need to address future changes and hazards in safety today
FAST offers a method of worldwide interest
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 43
FASTFAST
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION
For FAST Output Status see
http://fast.jrc.it
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 45
FASTFASTAcronyms
• ADREP ICAO Accident/Incident Data Reporting System• AoC Area of Change developed by FAST• AGS Air Ground Space System• ANSP Air Navigation Service Provider• ATC Air Traffic Control• AWOS Automatic Weather Observation System• CAST Commercial Aviation Safety Team (North America)• CICTT CAST/ICAO Common Taxonomy Team• ConOps In FAST context: Eurocontrol’s Concept of Operations
for 2011• ConOps General: air traffic providers concept of operations• ESSI European Safety Strategy Initiative• ECAST European Commercial Aviation Safety Team (EuroCAST)• ECCAIRS European Co-ordination Centre for Aviation Incident
Reporting Systems
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 46
FASTFASTAcronyms - continued
• FAST Future Aviation Safety Team• GTG Gate-to-Gate• ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization• JAA Joint Aviation Authorities (Europe)• JSSI JAA Safety Strategy Initiative• JSAT Joint Safety Analysis Team (CAST)• JSIT Joint Safety Implementation Team (CAST)• JPDO Joint Planning and Development Office (part of NGATS in
USA)• NGATS Next Generation Air Transportation System (USA)• SESAR Single European Sky ATM Research Programme• TCAS Traffic Collision Avoidance System• TAWS Terrain Avoidance Warning System
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 47
FASTFASTFAST Contribution to CAST Safety Plan
Introducing and integrating the Prospective component of safety
AccidentAnalysis JSATS
“Historic”
AccidentJSIT’s
SafetyEnhancements
CASTPlan
Incident AnalysisProcess
“Historic”
SafetyMetrics
JIMDATProcess
EmergingRisk
ChangingRisk
Enhancements
AviationSystem
Changes
PresentIn MasterFactors?
Yes
No
ExternalChanges
Identify FutureHazards
IdentifyCausalFactors
DevelopContributing
Factors(new or
emerging)
MasterContributing
Factors
B. Smith; 2/7/06
CAST Plan Revision
OperationalData Analysis(NASA ISDSR)“Diagnostic”
Predictive Analysis(FAST & FST)“Prognostic”
RemainingRisk
JSA/IT
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 48
FASTFASTArea of Change (AoC) Submission Process
Continuous CallFor New Aoc’s
FAST Core Team
External Group or Individual
CandidateAoC
Comparison withExisting AoC List
New?
Evaluate forPotential to
Enrich ExistingAoC’s
no
Refine Wording& Add Descriptive
Comments
Review forFAST Consistency
Okay?yes
Concatenateto ExistingAoC List
yes
no
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 50
FASTFAST
Examples of global Air Ground Space system Technology Watch ItemsTheme I
• Development of system using Artificial Intelligence (e.g. neural nets, fuzzy logic).
• Development of “intelligent” aircraft (with systems of smart sensors, microprocessors and adaptive control that monitor operator performance, environment and automatically avoid hazardous situations)
• Emergence of computational capabilities and monitoring systems that could replace conventional air traffic control functions
• Development of “intelligent” vehicles (e.g. smart cars) as cross fertilisation may affect aviation
• Collaborative decision making (CDM); Computer Support to Cooperative Work (CSCW)
• eSafety of road and air transport and eHealth, Multimodal Interfaces, Semantic-based knowledge systems, technology-enhanced learning
FAST Generic Presentation March, 2007. 51
FASTFAST
If at some point in the past, a study of the potential future hazards related to Reduced Vertical Separation Minima (RVSM) had been conducted, the Expert Team performing the analysis would likely have needed to generate the following description of the potential consequences of implementation of RVSM in order to extract potential future hazards…
"Assuming that each airplane has physical enhancements and each crew has procedures to properly manage vertical separation less than current rules, we believe that increased collision hazard is not likely. There however is a slight hazard increase due to wake turbulence descending from overhead airplanes and causing loss of control of encountering aircraft. We therefore recommend that there a study be done of all existing airplanes to determine the likelihood of a strong cruise wake descending to flight levels occupied by other aircraft, minus the altitude uncertainty. Altitude uncertainty must be considered and quantified in the study however, because actual separation may be much less than the candidate reduced value. We also recommend review of TCAS/ACAS protection with the FAA to ensure that the TCAS will not significantly contribute to collision likelihood. We want to avoid TCAS causing an accident. We hear however that the Military will be fielding new navigation technology, GPS, which if applied to civilian airplanes, will significantly increase the lateral precision with which airplanes will fly intended airways. Airplanes will then be closer to each other vertically and laterally. In this case, collision and/or wake vortex upset risk may significantly increase. If you see intentions to adopt GPS technology for civil transport navigation (watch item), then we recommend that studies are conducted and the Industry agrees to mitigating practices such as intentional cross-track stagger. Care should be taken when doing so to ensure that wind direction is considered in the study."
Example* of how Customer Vision of Future would have beenused in past…
* - purely hypothetical; not representative of FAST recommendations