The document analyzes risk levels and causal factors for incidents involving Southwest Airlines aircraft from 1990-2020. It finds that the B737-700 saw the highest number of medium-risk incidents, equipment issues were the top cause of medium-high risk occurrences, and the maintenance department saw the most total incidents. The initial climb phase had the most incidents, and bird strikes and system component failures were the most common occurrence types. The conclusion calls for Southwest to improve maintenance procedures and preflight checks.
In 1994, the University of Texas Human Research Project and Delta Airline developed the Line Operations Safety Audit (LOSA) program. With time, the LOSA program evolved into what is now known as Threat and Error Management (TEM).
The TEM framework is an applied concept which emerged from the observations and surveys of actual flight operations. It considers the various issues that a flight crew may encounter as a result of internal and external factors.
This model explores the contributing factors of the threat to aviation safety and, in turn, allows for the unearthing of ways to mitigate them and maintain proper safety margins. Now recognized and adopted across continents, the TEM framework aims to educate flight personnel on managing threats and errors before they degenerate into serious incidents or accidents. It is important to note that TEM is also applicable to maintenance operations, cabin crew, and air traffic control.
How can you prepare your company to avoid unnecessary losses? Experts in the insurance, safety and risk management arena will provide detailed industry-specific information that you can begin using right away to protect your company and its financial health for years to come. You’ll leave this session with a clear understanding of why loss prevention is as essential for survival as regulatory compliance.
Speakers:
Kent Miller, Field Supervisor, Safety, Claims and Litigation Services (SCLS)
Dave Wittwer, Vice President, Hays Companies
In 1994, the University of Texas Human Research Project and Delta Airline developed the Line Operations Safety Audit (LOSA) program. With time, the LOSA program evolved into what is now known as Threat and Error Management (TEM).
The TEM framework is an applied concept which emerged from the observations and surveys of actual flight operations. It considers the various issues that a flight crew may encounter as a result of internal and external factors.
This model explores the contributing factors of the threat to aviation safety and, in turn, allows for the unearthing of ways to mitigate them and maintain proper safety margins. Now recognized and adopted across continents, the TEM framework aims to educate flight personnel on managing threats and errors before they degenerate into serious incidents or accidents. It is important to note that TEM is also applicable to maintenance operations, cabin crew, and air traffic control.
How can you prepare your company to avoid unnecessary losses? Experts in the insurance, safety and risk management arena will provide detailed industry-specific information that you can begin using right away to protect your company and its financial health for years to come. You’ll leave this session with a clear understanding of why loss prevention is as essential for survival as regulatory compliance.
Speakers:
Kent Miller, Field Supervisor, Safety, Claims and Litigation Services (SCLS)
Dave Wittwer, Vice President, Hays Companies
To predict the injury severity of an aircraft crash with the help of National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) data since the year 1962 and design a classification model using machine learning algorithms.
Bruce Carmichael, Director, Aviation Applications Program, National Center for Atmospheric Research
February 2016 - UCAR Congressional Briefing on Aviation Weather Safety
Video of this presentation: https://president.ucar.edu/government-relations/washington-update/3594/aviation-weather-safety-ucar-congressional-briefing
Dr Ian Hosegood, Medical Director for Qantas Airways gives a great talk on In-Flight Medical Emergencies, including common complaints, what you can and can't do, diversions, and might even touch on how to get an upgrade
Aeronautical Decision Making And Risk Management For PilotsMySkyMom
This presentation relies heavily on the FAA\'s Risk Management Handbook, which can be found at http://www.faa.gov It covers factors related to ADM, statistics, best practices, and related case studies.
Activity 3.4 Tutorial My hypothesis is that the majority o.docxcoubroughcosta
Activity 3.4 Tutorial
My hypothesis is that the majority of FAR Part 135 fatal crashes that occurred between January 2000
and December 2010 in Alaska were associated with limited visibility environments. So, I entered as
many of those variables as possible (See below). I highlighted the word variables, to give you a hint as to
what else needs to be reported in Week 3.
My variables are Part 135 operations; fatal crashes; the dates set; Alaska; and probable
cause/contributing factors. Since I said “…were associated with limited visibility”, I must look at causes
and contributing factors, but how do I do this? Once you have the query form completed, hit the search
NTSB button on the top right hand corner of the query screen. My query resulted in 29 events involving
29 aircraft. Following is partial screen shot of my query results.
From here, I can see a great deal of useful information, but much of the data I do not need, like the
NTSB number, Aircraft Registration Number, Event Type, State Code, Type and Category of Operation.
And, I still don’t see causes or contributing factors! How can I manipulate these events? Easy, just below
the query response spreadsheet (left side), you will see an icon that says “CSV Download”. Click this
icon, which transfers this non-user friendly spreadsheet format into a more useable format, such as
Excel. DO NOT DELETE the original results page as this provides the individual hyperlink to each accident.
Now, let’s get rid of the columns I don’t need and add the columns I do need. If you are not Excel savvy,
to remove a column, put your cursor over column A, right on the A, right click your mouse and hit
delete. To add, do the same, but select insert and give the column a title. Following is my Excel
Database once I removed the columns I did not need and added column F for VMC_IMC. When I find an
event that was associated with limited visibility, I am going to enter a “1”. If limited visibility was not the
cause, I will enter a “0”. This helps me run an analysis. Your column entries may vary.
Now I need to go back and forth between my original results page and my Excel spreadsheet, so I saved
each to ensure nothing was accidentally omitted or changed. Back to my original results, I select an
event by clicking on the NTSB Report # ANC04FA063. This opens that particular crash report, which gives
me a long list of variables that can be used for different analysis: location, weather, aircraft/engine
information, ELT installed/working, pilot experience, sequence of events, and dialogue about the
accident itself. I’ve included this report in its entirety at the end of this document. Keep in mind, some
reports may be preliminary. You can choose to delete these from your analysis if you wish, just specify
this in your methodology. It is not required for this case study.
Back to the visibility issue… I have included a snapshot below, of the Sequence of.
Understanding the Power of the Schneider Electric Enhanced Flight Hazard Prod...Schneider Electric
One of the challenges facing flight planners and flight dispatchers is the lack of access to reliable and timely flight hazards information needed to make informed decisions. Traditional flight hazard forecasts are categorical, providing general ‘light’, ‘moderate’, or ‘severe’ descriptions. They cover large geographical areas that force flight planners and flight dispatchers to make assumptions or route around large areas — adding time and cost to the flight.
This non-specificity leaves the user to interpret the severity, timing, and location of the potential flight disruption. To eliminate guesswork and increase safe and efficient operations, aviation businesses need flight hazard forecasts that are timely, accurate and granular.
Understanding the Power of the Schneider Electric Enhanced Flight Hazard Prod...
8AA SMS221 Analysis
1. Group Eight - 8AA SMS 221NAA
The Data analysis of Southwest Airlines
SeyedHamed Jabbari Behnam 016460156
Courtney Young 035044114
Nicoy Davis 111996153
2. Group 8AA SMS221 1
The Data Analysis of Southwest Airlines’ Incidents
Risk Level by Aircraft Type:
High level of risk Medium level of risk Low level of risk
B737-300 5 18 16
B737-500 0 2 2
B737-700 8 22 14
B737-800 1 1 2
In regards to risk level by aircraft type, Southwest’s largest aircraft (B737-800’s) saw the
fewest accidents/incidents with low level risk being more frequent. Astonishingly enough,
Southwest’s B737-700’s experienced the highest level and medium level incidents. The B737-
500’s reassuringly saw no high level risk incidents and very few medium and low level risk
occurrences.
Risk Level by Causal Factors:
High level of risk Medium level of risk Low level of risk
People 4 3 3
Equipment 6 22 25
Environment 4 18 5
Organization 0 0 1
0
5
10
15
20
25
B737-300 B737-500 B737-700 B737-800
NumbersofIncidents
Type of Aircraft
Risk Level by Aircraft Type
High level of risk
Medium level of risk
Low level of risk
3. Group 8AA SMS221 2
According to the data collected, the airlines equipment seems to be the number one cause
for medium and high level risk incidents. Whether there was smoke in the cabin, problematic
landing gear or fuel leakage, these all resulted in low to high risk occurrences. Southwest’s
organization was responsible for the fewest amount of episodes. In one occurrence, a drone was
seen on approach. With good communication however, this event only led to a low level risk
incident.
Risk Level by Department:
High level of risk Medium level of risk Low level of risk
Maintenance 9 38 30
Flight Ops. 3 4 2
Commercial 2 1 2
Our findings resulted in Southwest’s maintenance department to be more involved in the
airline’s occurrences. This does not necessarily mean that they are at fault for the majority of
events, but they are undeniably the department that resolves the issue afterwards. Most incidents
result in maintenance ensuring that the aircraft is safe to fly or if it needs to be repaired.
Therefore, the amount of low, medium and high risk events that they are involved with is logical.
The commercial department and flight operations department do not particularly compare with
the maintenance department with the commercial department having the least involvement.
0
5
10
15
20
25
People Equipment Environment Organization
High level of risk
Medium level of risk
Low level of risk
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
High level of risk
Medium level of risk
Low level of risk
Commercial
Flight Ops.
Maintenance
4. Group 8AA SMS221 3
Risk Level by Flight Phases:
High level of risk Medium level of risk Low level of risk
APR 1 9 6
ENR 6 7 14
ICL 4 20 10
LDG 2 1 4
TXI 1 2 0
TOF 0 4 0
It is concluded that during the initial climb, Southwest Airlines saw the most
accidents/incidents. During this phase of flight is when an engine would fail or the aircraft would
strike a bird which were two of the more frequent causal factors. These incidents typically
resulted in a low to medium level of risk. Trailing behind, the enroute phase of flight also lead to
a few more events than the other phases of flight. This could have been caused by turbulence
resulting in injury as it was quite recurrent. Taxiing and take-off could possibly be acknowledged
as the safest phase of flight for Southwest Airlines as they both result in zero low level risk
occurrences and very few medium level risk incidents.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
APR ENR ICL LDG TXI TOF
High level of risk
Medium level of risk
Low level of risk
5. Group 8AA SMS221 4
OCCURRENCE TYPES:
Based on the information gathered the following key findings were determined:
25% of the incidents/ accidents were related to Bird Strikes, while 14% were related system
component failures (non power plant) such as Damaged tires, problems with flaps and landing
gear, and 12% of cabin related issues varying from smoke smell in cabin to issues with
pressurization. 10% were system component failure (power plant) such as one more Engine
failures enroute. This might could be due to poor maintenance and an aging fleet.
6. Group 8AA SMS221 5
Conclusion:
Thorough analysis of the 90 Aviation Herald Accident reports on Southwest Airlines the
following key findings were determined:
25% of accidents/incidents were related to bird strikes.
14% of incidents/accidents were related to system component failures.
Southwest B737-700’s experienced the highest level of medium risk incidents.
The airlines Equipment is at the number causal factor of medium to high level incidents.
The department that saw the most occurrences was maintenance.
The phase of flight in which the accidents were most prone was determined to be the
Initial Climb.
With 14% of incidents related to system component failures and resulting in equipment being the
cause of 22 medium level risk and 6 high level risk, the airline needs to implement better
maintenance procedures in relation to aircraft maintenance. The airline also needs to review its
SOP as it relates to preflight checks to ensure that its aircraft are truly fit to fly.
Some of the challenges faced while compiling the data are as follows:
No consistency in the way data is reported in the AV Herald for example some reports
listed total crew and pax separately whilst some reports just listed total souls onboard.
Meticulous caution has to be taken when entering data in order to maintain accuracy.
The weather column was of no use as out of 90 reported incidents only 4 report weather
conditions.