FOQA and corporate

[Wardogg]

We are currently in the works at implementing a FOQA program at my part 91 management company. Looking for insight from anyone that has utilized this type of program in a corporate environment.

Best practices.
How do we use the data see without it looking like a punitive over the shoulder system?
How do we utilize the program to best increase safety in our organization?

 

[ppragman]

We are currently in the works at implementing a FOQA program at my part 91 management company. Looking for insight from anyone that has utilized this type of program in a corporate environment.

Best practices.
How do we use the data see without it looking like a punitive over the shoulder system?
How do we utilize the program to best increase safety in our organization?

Oh hi! I wanted to get stuff like this going in my organization before I got sick.

So, FOQA is pretty easy, but you have to choose the right toolkit to do it with, and then you have to wait awhile and actually do some statistics to make things better.

If you want to actually use it for safety-related things quality improvements... it's not something you can turn on over night. You'll need to gather data. I have been meaning to get back to you in pm, but just got busy with school and can only procrastinate so much, but I am happy to help with this sort of thing to the best of my abilities time permitting.

Starting off, do you guys have a SMS?

 

[Wardogg]

Oh hi! I wanted to get stuff like this going in my organization before I got sick.

So, FOQA is pretty easy, but you have to choose the right toolkit to do it with, and then you have to wait awhile and actually do some statistics to make things better.

If you want to actually use it for safety-related things quality improvements... it's not something you can turn on over night. You'll need to gather data. I have been meaning to get back to you in pm, but just got busy with school and can only procrastinate so much, but I am happy to help with this sort of thing to the best of my abilities time permitting.

Starting off, do you guys have a SMS?

Yeah we have an SMS. Utilizing operation risk management matrices, ASAP program, Incident Hazard reports. So far we have 2 airplanes currently collecting data and plan to eventually have all of them hopefully by years end.

Our problem is we are a small company, only 10 or so airplanes total and 6 different models inside of that number. Right now most of us are keeping current on 2 different types so each airplane is only being flown by mainly 2-3 PICs and a handful more of SICs. My concern is if there is a FOQA "triggered" event that the company is going to try and reach out to the crew for more information. To try and figure out what happened. I quickly inserted myself into this program as we were bringing it online and have expressed these concerns. As I understood the program to be anonymous and data collecting. IE why is a certain airplane always high on approach going into Scottsdale when landing to the southwest and what can we do as a company to mitigate the risks associated with that.

I wanted to see if anyone else was using the program and see if we could avoid any pitfalls they may have encountered early in their implementation.

 

[arkflyr]

I was working on getting this turned on at my old shop before I left so it's been a while and my knowledge is old and stale. What it sounds like you need is to define a policy for what happens when FOQA flags and event so that both pilots and management can have the same expectations of when, if, and how the company will contact the crew for more information and then what comes after. I think you were former 121 so you are familiar with the gatekeeper and how unionized airlines handle FOQA, that is the difficult part of setting this up in a small department where everyone knows everyone.

Another place to look for information about this for 91 operations would be propilotworld, if you haven't already looked there. Way more corporate guys over there than here and may have better insight.

Good luck, sounds like you all are on the right track with your SMS and ASAP program.

 

[CoffeeIcePapers]

How do we use the data see without it looking like a punitive over the shoulder system?

This is a big challenge for a small flight department. At the airlines, union gatekeepers are the only ones who see the identifying data. At a small flight department, this is impossible. It would almost be better to outsource gate keeping to a third party or something in this situation.

 

[Wardogg]

I was working on getting this turned on at my old shop before I left so it's been a while and my knowledge is old and stale. What it sounds like you need is to define a policy for what happens when FOQA flags and event so that both pilots and management can have the same expectations of when, if, and how the company will contact the crew for more information and then what comes after.

This is a great suggestion.

I think you were former 121 so you are familiar with the gatekeeper and how unionized airlines handle FOQA, that is the difficult part of setting this up in a small department where everyone knows everyone.

I am former. My exposure was very very limited but I thought I understood the intent of the program. So I offered to be involved.

Another place to look for information about this for 91 operations would be propilotworld, if you haven't already looked there. Way more corporate guys over there than here and may have better insight.

Good luck, sounds like you all are on the right track with your SMS and ASAP program.

Thanks! Ill check it out.

This is a big challenge for a small flight department. At the airlines, union gatekeepers are the only ones who see the identifying data. At a small flight department, this is impossible. It would almost be better to outsource gate keeping to a third party or something in this situation.

Also a great suggestion. I'll look into that as well.

 

[Minuteman]

Yup, can confirm that the concept of gatekeepers is common in the corporate FOQA world, both 91 and 135. I believe most countries in Europe require 135 operations to have a qualified program before landing there. So the portion of a 135 OpSpec that addresses the program can define how the program is operated: how the data review process happens and who’s responsible (if possible, don’t include what will be analyzed because it changes over time).

FOQA alerts are not uncommon; think of them like ASAP reports from a different source. Every report should not warrant a management investigation, and frankly, a “casual data analyst” can reach an unusual conclusion from raw data.

One program I am familiar with produces PDF reports of alerts on a quarterly basis (which have been reviewed before publication). The reports contain your operation’s occurrence rates versus a larger population, as well one-page as detail information about each, and FOQA can be managed by a single person. This can go a long way towards populating a risk matrix and answering “how are we doing?” and “where can we change?” (none of which would be helped by acting on anything less than the most-severe specific occurrence), which becomes feed for the safety risk management process of an SMS manager.

The size of the 91 operation depends on how many hats an individual might wear: SMS manager, gatekeeper and director of ops would be a stretch.

 

[Wardogg]

Yup, can confirm that the concept of gatekeepers is common in the corporate FOQA world, both 91 and 135. I believe most countries in Europe require 135 operations to have a qualified program before landing there. So the portion of a 135 OpSpec that addresses the program can define how the program is operated: how the data review process happens and who’s responsible (if possible, don’t include what will be analyzed because it changes over time).

FOQA alerts are not uncommon; think of them like ASAP reports from a different source. Every report should not warrant a management investigation, and frankly, a “casual data analyst” can reach an unusual conclusion from raw data.

One program I am familiar with produces PDF reports of alerts on a quarterly basis (which have been reviewed before publication). The reports contain your operation’s occurrence rates versus a larger population, as well one-page as detail information about each, and FOQA can be managed by a single person. This can go a long way towards populating a risk matrix and answering “how are we doing?” and “where can we change?” (none of which would be helped by acting on anything less than the most-severe specific occurrence), which becomes feed for the safety risk management process of an SMS manager.

The size of the 91 operation depends on how many hats an individual might wear: SMS manager, gatekeeper and director of ops would be a stretch.

So right now, those are 3 different people. 2 SMS managers 2 gatekeepers(of which I am one as of now), and a DoO.

However the DoO, likes to "be involved" if that makes sense.

 

[Inverted25]

So right now, those are 3 different people. 2 SMS managers 2 gatekeepers(of which I am one as of now), and a DoO.

However the DoO, likes to "be involved" if that makes sense.

You can outsource the entire thing. I forget the name of the company but they get all the data and produce unidentified reports. It avoids it being punitive because no one at the company sees the individual events. You just get a report detailing the main type of events so the company can see if there is something that needs addressed in your SOPs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[///AMG]

This might not be a popular thought, but i think these programs have limited utility. If run correctly, they will confirm what we already know....some airports have a high rate of unstable approaches continued to a landing. Or *related* there is a problem with whatever ATC agency dropping people off at an over energized state, leading to such outcomes. That is all good and well, but where the vine dies is fixing the problem identified. There are probably over a dozen airports in our network that have FOQA data confirming hazards, but the loop isn’t seemingly closed ever. Just be aware ok? I was an SMS “manager” for a brief period last year on mil orders, and i will say our adaption of FOQA is entirely punitive. So my thoughts might be skewed.

 

[KLB]

So right now, those are 3 different people. 2 SMS managers 2 gatekeepers(of which I am one as of now), and a DoO.

However the DoO, likes to "be involved" if that makes sense.

Yeah. It's best to outsource with your department getting quaterly reports vs the rest of the industry. It needs to be more about the data than appearing to be a way of spying on your operation. The DO involvement is concerning.

 

[DE727UPS]

Is ONT coming in from the north on your list?

 

[Wardogg]

Is ONT coming in from the north on your list?

No but SDL to 21 is. SHOCK at 12k and 250 never works out for stable approach criteria.
Every time high and fast.

 

[Wardogg]

You can outsource the entire thing. I forget the name of the company but they get all the data and produce unidentified reports. It avoids it being punitive because no one at the company sees the individual events. You just get a report detailing the main type of events so the company can see if there is something that needs addressed in your SOPs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The DO and I recently had a conversation where he stated that outsourcing the data could be an option. Were you thinking of GE? That's who's software we are currently using to collect and convert the data into reports now. But we are doing it, not GE.

 

[pwttogfk]

Not sure what kind of aircraft you’re operating but the Citation Jet Pilots Association has a FOQA program that does exactly what you’re looking for. Any Textron product with ARES II is supported without additional hardware; there’s some extra hardware required for older planes. Currently negotiating with our insurance provider to see how much of a discount we’ll get for joining the program. I hope enough owner-pilots join up to make our data not look too bad

 

[TUCKnTRUCK]

This might not be a popular thought, but i think these programs have limited utility. If run correctly, they will confirm what we already know....some airports have a high rate of unstable approaches continued to a landing. Or *related* there is a problem with whatever ATC agency dropping people off at an over energized state, leading to such outcomes. That is all good and well, but where the vine dies is fixing the problem identified. There are probably over a dozen airports in our network that have FOQA data confirming hazards, but the loop isn’t seemingly closed ever. Just be aware ok? I was an SMS “manager” for a brief period last year on mil orders, and i will say our adaption of FOQA is entirely punitive. So my thoughts might be skewed.

Depends how you use it. A ways back new DO mandated full flaps landings on contaminated runways- which most crews never did because the Ice switch added like 20 knots to the ref speed. If you wanted to make the touchdown zone you had to force the airplane onto the runway with that much extra speed.

Regardless, pilot with no actual experience in the airplane said “this is now policy”.

FOQA immediately flagged a spike in nose wheel first landings. Shortly thereafter the policy was rescinded.

Sometimes data helps make effective policy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk