Safety Management System Air Traffic Control Safety Joseph Teixeira Federal Aviation Administration Air Traffic Organization Vice President, Safety and Technical Training 1
SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM • Required by International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and FAA international safety standards • Began implementation in 2005; approved in 2010 2
ATO SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM: WHERE WE’RE GOING • Improvement/maturation : • Emphasis on quantifiable data collection/analysis • Better monitoring through lower-level indicators of safety risk • Incorporation of DO 278 standards • Adoption of an international maturity model for assessment • Full SMS implementation in other FAA lines of business (Aviation Safety, Airports, Commercial Space Transportation) • Integrated FAA SMS: • FAA-wide hazard tracking system • Common taxonomy • International harmonization 3
EXAMPLE: ADS-B IN-TRAIL PROCEDURES (ITP) ADS-B Transceiver and Onboard Decision Support System ADS-B Out (required) No ADS-B capabilities required DESIRED ALTITUDE FL360 FL350 Standard Separation FL340 = NEED CHALLENGE OPPORTUNITIES Use airborne ADS-B Altitude changes required The combination of applications to enable for better fuel economy, locally dense traffic and winds, and ride quality altitude changes otherwise large separation minima blocked by conventional limits altitude changes operations 4
ADS-B ITP ACCOMPLISHMENTS • In cooperation with RTCA and the European Organization for Civil Aviation Equipment (EUROCAE): • Concept of Operations • Operational Performance Assessment • Operational Safety Assessment • Safety, Performance, and Interoperability Requirements Document • Collision Risk Analysis • Collision risk models presented to ICAO Separation and Airspace Safety Panel (SASP) and accepted by the mathematical sub-group • ITP operation circular approved and forwarded to the ICAO Air Navigation Commission • ITP procedure to be incorporated in ICAO Procedures for Air Navigation Services, Air Traffic Management 5
ADS-B ITP SAFETY RISK MANAGEMENT DOCUMENT • System hazard analysis • Collision risk models • Air traffic controller procedures • Flight crew procedures • Operational Safety Risk Management monitoring plan 6
ADS-B ITP OPERATIONAL HAZARDS INITIAL PREDICTED NUMBER HAZARD RISK RESIDUAL RISK Flight crew performs an ITP operation incorrectly OH-1 4D (Low) 4D (Low) and not compliant with the ITP procedure Air traffic control approves an ITP operation OH-2 4E (Low) 4E (Low) that is not compliant with the ITP procedure Reference aircraft maneuvers during the ITP OH-3 3D (Low) 3D (Low) operation when not cleared by air traffic control OH-4 ITP or reference aircraft encounters wake turbulence 5A (Low) 5A (Low) Controller overlooks an actual conflict between aircraft because of the OH-5 additional Conflict Alerts generated by the 3D (Low) 3D (Low) ITP operations Failure of ITP Electronic Flight Bag during ITP OH-6 5C (Low) 5C (Low) maneuver causes loss of situational awareness 7
EXAMPLE: SRM QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS LOSS OF GPS Failure of ITP Electronic Flight Bag CAPABILITY OH-6 during ITP maneuver causes loss of situational awareness GATE 1 Q=7.13E-5 RADIO FREQUENCY DEGRADATION OF GPS FAILURE OF GPS INTERFERENCE WITH ACCURACY / INTEGRITY INFRASTRUCTURE GPS SIGNAL BELOW THRESHOLD BC 17 BC 18 BC 19 Q=5.5E-05 Q=6.35E-6 Q=1E-05 GROUND STATIONS MULTIPLE GPS UPLINK BAD DATA TO SATELLITES FAIL SATELLITES BC 18A BC 18B Q=1E-08 Q=6.34E-06
EXAMPLE: SRM QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS RATIONALE / FREQUENCY PER FLIGHT NUMBER DESCRIPTION COMMENTS HOUR 5.5E-05�RTCA DO-318 ADS B RAD 3.2.1.3 Intentional GPS interference is considered a (6):�It is assumed that the likelihood of a security issue per SCAP. Wide-area jamming is Radiofrequency interference with GNSS signal-in- space interference event BC 17 most likely near a terminal area, which should GPS signal causing a wide-area loss of horizontal position be covered by terminal radar, unless the radar is 5.5E-05 per flight hour, based on historical has also failed. performance. There has not been a total system failure since 18 years = 157,680 hours�Better than 6.34E- BC 18 Failure of the GPS infrastructure the start of GPS service in 1994. 06 per hour 1E-8 per hour likelihood of 2 simultaneous BC 18A Multiple GPS satellites fail independent satellite failures, per GPS SPS PS Ground stations uplink bad data to 18 years = 157,680 hours�Better than 6.34E- BC 18B satellites 06 per hour The accuracy and integrity of the position Degradation of GPS accuracy reports are below the threshold for surveillance BC 19 GPS SPS PS indicates 1E-5 per hour and/or integrity below threshold and navigation for many aircraft in a geographic region, but the GPS network is still operational. All aircraft not equipped with Q=0.99248, based on 25% non-alternate ENV 4 ANDed with GT 1 alternative means of navigation electronic navigation equipage rate Two or more radars unavailable in Q=1.14E-3 per flight hour, based on historical EVENT 1 a region, creating an Environment radar performance B ADS-B-only airspace 9
10 MEASURES CURRENT SAFETY
2012 – YEAR OF TRANSITION ESTABLISHING A NEW BASELINE FROM TO National Voluntary Reporting Local Reporting Automated Electronic Detection Minimal Local Electronic Monitoring Standardized Risk Analysis Operational Incident Counts Application of Risk Matrix Distance-Based Categorization Addressing Systemic Issues (TOP 5) Single Event Mitigation Identification of High Risk Events Categorization Buckets (A, B, C) Investigation and ID Causal Factors Event Reporting Metric on ratio of High Risk Events A+B Metric National High-Priority Goal Local Mitigation Monitoring on Addressing Risk Mitigation RESULT: A nearly 300% increase in reported incidents 11 8
A NEW APPROACH TO RISK ANALYSIS TARP CEDAR 10x MORE DATA DALR OVER LAST 3 ATSAP YEARS CISP OEDP 12
13 RISK ANALYSIS PROCESS: CAUSAL FACTORS
PROACTIVE OCCURRENCE REPORTING APRIL 2012 - MARCH 2013 Total Volume Air 130,437,567 Traffic Operations Mandatory/Electronic 206,943 Occurrences for Review Processed 205,596 Mandatory/Electronic Occurrences Validated Losses of 5,918 Separation 1,860 Risk Analysis Events 37 High-risk Events 0.00004537 Losses per Volume Note: Most validated losses have multiple record entries for each loss identified. Data is for a rolling period beginning February 2012. 14
SYSTEM RISK EVENT DATA 12-Month Rolling Rate # of High-risk RAEs / Total # of Validated Losses 15
16 Total Runway Incursions RUNWAY INCURSIONS Category A&B Runway Incursions
SAFETY DATA PORTAL: METRICS
SAFETY DATA PORTAL: METRICS
SAFETY DATA PORTAL: METRICS
SAFETY DATA PORTAL: METRICS
SAFETY DATA PORTAL: METRICS
22 WE MEASURE SUCCESS BY WHAT WE FIX
2013 RECOVERY TRAFFIC ADVISORIES/SAFETY ALERTS MONITORING INITIAL DEPARTURE HEADINGS SIMILAR SOUNDING CALL SIGNS CONFLICTING PROCEDURES 23
2013 90% - 80% 80% - ANNUAL DOT 70% - PERFORMANCE GOAL 60% - 50% - 40% - 30% - 21% 20% - FAA PERFORMANCE TO DATE 10% - 4 CLOSED 0 - 19 MITIGATIONS 24
RESULTS: VOLUNTARY SAFETY REPORTING PROACTIVE 63,000 REACTIVE ATSAP REPORTS TO DATE 5,000 • 64% OF ELIGIBLE PERSONNEL HAVE FILED REPORT APPROXIMATE • 300-350 REPORTS PER OPERATIONAL INCIDENTS OVER 3 WEEK YEARS 170 CORRECTIONS SINCE PROGRAM INCEPTION Note: As of FY13-Q2 25
RESULTS: CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION SHARING PROGRAM FY12 26
27 SAFETY PERFORMANCE NEXTGEN METRICS
COMMERCIAL CATASTROPHIC ACCIDENT RATE PER FLIGHT HOUR WITH DIRECT ATM CONTRIBUTION US Accident Rate Official European TLS Operational Operational 1.55 x 10 -8 0.72 x 10 -8 Design Design 1 x 10 -9 1 x 10 -9 Through Redundancy Through Redundancy How should we value Human Performance in Design Standards?
NEXTGEN TRANSFORMATION FROM TO Ground-based navigation/surveillance Satellite-based navigation/surveillance Voice radio control Digital data exchange Disconnected information systems Net-centric information access Human-centric air traffic control Automation-assisted air traffic management Fragmented weather forecasting Probabilistic weather decision tools Limited-visibility airfield parameters Equivalent visual operations Forensic safety system Prognostic safety system Inefficient security screening Integrated security risk management Current aircraft environmental footprint Reduced aircraft environmental footprint 29
POTENTIAL SAFETY CHALLENGES IN 2020 • Controller situational awareness • Increased number of alerts/notifications • Decision support tools • Propagation of inaccurate information (throughout interrelated NAS) • Detection/recovery from safety events • No reduction in existing safety barriers • Mixed equipage 30
INTEGRATED SAFETY MANAGEMENT • Enterprise-focused, risk- based assessments throughout the lifecycle of solution • Early identification of safety issues • Integrated safety analyses across vertical, horizontal, and temporal planes • Hazard and mitigation effectiveness tracking 31
Questions? _________________________ WWW.FAA.GOV/Go/ATOSafety 3 2
Recommend
More recommend
