segurança de aviação - importância, evolução...

Prof. Donizeti de Andrade, Ph.D.

AUDITÓRIO B, Instituto Tecnológico de Aeronáutica

2007…

por

Prof. DONIZETI DE ANDRADE, Ph.D.

[email protected]

SSV10, Grupo Especial de Ensaios em Vôo

4 de agosto de 2010

Segurança de Aviação: IMPORTÂNCIA, EVOLUÇÃO

HISTÓRICA E STATUS ATUAL


Evolução da visão dos conceitos fundamentais, ao

longo dos anos, especialmente pós-Sept 11, 2001;

É possível reduzir ainda mais o atual índice de

acidentes catastróficos por milhão de decolagens na

aviação comercial?

Como conciliar novas tecnologias, visão ambiental,

crescimento do tráfego aéreo, novos requisitos com a

necessidade de ser competitivo no mercado?

Pode o nosso trabalho ser, ao mesmo tempo, efetivo

no micro e no macro contexto?

MULIDISCIPLINARIDADEMULIDISCIPLINARIDADEMULIDISCIPLINARIDADE

Temas Recorrentes que nos Afetam...C

OM

PLEX

IDA

DE

CO

MP

LEX

IDA

DE

CO

MP

LEX

IDA

DE


A Importância da Segurança de Aviação

Pilares;

Complexidade Associada e Multidisciplinaridade;

Aviação (setor, “industry”) como negócio;

Aviação: setor organizado e seguro.

Evolução Histórica

Regulamentação dos anos 1920 até agora + “Milestones”

de projeto e de operações.

Status Atual

Efeitos da Globalização;

Human Factors Legislation + NexGen;

Global Aviation Safety Roadmap.

Mensagem Final

AGENDA


AGENDA


Pilares;







Status Atual




Mensagem Final


AVIATIONSAFETY

OPERATIONS INTEGRITY

Design

Certification

Production

Quality Control

Quality Assurance

Flight + Maintenance

SOP

MEL

Training

Safety Programs

Repair

Policies aligned to Management

Monitoring and Updating bothProduct and Operations Integrity

(Services Difficulty)

MSG-3, MMEL, CDL, AFM

(adaptado de Serra, P.R.F.Notas de Aula, “Safety Assessment”

PE-Safety ITA, 2007)

Pilares da Segurança de Aviação

PRODUCT INTEGRITY

CONTINUING OPERATIONALSAFETY (COS)

CONTINUED AIRWORTHINESS


Complexidade Associada e Multidisciplinaridade

¶ Boeing’s Accident Rates and Onboard Fatalities by Year

Worldwide Commercial Jet Fleet – 1959 Through

2008

¶ NTSB, CAA, CENIPA and NALL Accident Statistics

(Dr. Katherine Andrea Lemos, HF in Aviation Safety,

ITA June 2010)

¶ One-day Air Traffic Over the World, 240+ passengers

aircraft


Resultados devido à atividade de prevenção

Impactos

Fonte: Scigliano, A.G.D.G. e al.Trabalho, Disciplina de “Ambientes de

Negócios da Aviação: uma Perspectiva Estratégica”PE-Safety ITA, 2009


Impactos

Resultados devido à atividade de prevenção

Fonte: Scigliano, A.G.D.G. e al.Trabalho, Disciplina de “Ambientes de



Development of § 1309 AC /ACJ 1309-1

Software Evolution of § 1309 Highly integrated systems

ARP 4761

ARP 4754Automation

AC / AMJ 1309( Draft Arsenal )

DE ONDE VIEMOS

(Serra, P.R.F.Notas de Aula, “Safety Assessment”

PE-Safety ITA, 2004)


Annual hull losses

Onde Estamos

Airline safety 2010 so far: out of idea

From January to June airlines suffered 9 fatal accidents in which 415 people died

DATE:03/08/2010SOURCE: Flight International

by David Learmount


WORLDWIDE HULL LOSS PROJECTIONAnnual hull losses

Source: Boeing

Based on Expected Fleet Growth

Year1990 1996 2000 2005 2010

12 1114

20

25

14

21

26

21

1985

49

21

Hull loss projection atcurrent accident rate

Industry goal: 50%reduction in accident rate

23.6Standarddeviation

41.2

20.6

2015

Actuals

Projection

10

20

30

40

50

If current accident rate holds

21 21

16

21 20 20

37

Airplanes in service

19,077

2004

438

1960

25,400

2015

Fonte: Assumpção, L.A. e al.Trabalho, Disciplina de “Segurança de Vôo”, SMS

PE-Safety ITA, 2007

PARA ONDE VAMOS


Aviação (setor, “industry”) como Negócio

COMO

EXPLICAR

?


• Fatores Econômicos

• Fatores Jurídicos e Institucionais

• Fatores Sócio-Ambientais

• Fatores Físico-Demográficos

• Fatores Tecnológicos

Fonte: Lucht, R.R.Ambiente de Negócio em Aviação:

uma Perspectiva EstratégicaPE-Safety ITA, 2008



Fatores econômicos:

Brasil: ~ 200 milhões de pessoas, 250(-) jatos;

US: ~ 300 milhões de pessoas, 5 mil(+) jatos;

Mercado brasileiro pode crescer de 3 a 4 X;

Tarifas aéreas no Brasil: 50% mais caras que nos US.

Fatores sócio-ambientais:

Brasil: 2% dos municípios (~115) são atendidos

pelas airlines regulares; 98% deles, fora da malha

aérea.

Necessidade de re-estruturar os aeroportos para

2014-2016...



Fatores sócio-ambientais (cont.):

~ 10 anos, frota de helicópteros civis cresceu

80%(+)... Com o pré-sal, isto deve se multiplicar...

Escassez de pilotos e co-pilotos de helicópteros + custo

da capacitação de novas equipagens;

350+ helipads elevados na Grande São Paulo:

tendência internacional de construção de vertiparks;

“Nova Lei” na cidade de São Paulo: relatório de

impacto de vizinhança + exigência de 10m de recuo

+ conflito de autoridade (ANAC + PMSP...)

10%(-) dos pilotos de helicópteros do Estado de São

Paulo possuem diploma universitário de graduação...



Criação da ICAO

Americanos e ingleses poderiam ter criado uma aviação

entre eles...

Algumas Comparações – High Reliability Operations (HRO)

Chemical (US)

NTSB/FAA = CSB/PHMSA

CBS: (US) Chemical Safety Board;

PHMSA: (US) Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety

Administration

Nuclear (internacional)

Medicine: “Patient Safety” (e.g., WHO, Harvard

University & UNIFESP joint publications, The Johns

Hopkins Hospital program)

Aviação: Setor Organizado e Seguro


AGENDA


Pilares;







Status Atual




Mensagem Final


DE ONDE VIEMOS, anos 1920s

Post-WWI Imagem da aviação como atividade de risco, ligada a aventuras;


... 2. Never leave the ground with the motor leaking. ...9. No machine must taxi faster than a man can walk. ...13. No two cadets should ever ride together in the same machine. 14. Do not trust altitude instruments. ...21. Pilots will not wear spurs while flying. ...24. Never take a machine into the air until you are familiar with its

controls and instruments.25. If an emergency occurs while flying, land as soon as possible.

Regulations for Operation of AircraftCommencing January 1920

DE ONDE VIEMOS, anos 1920s


1910s 1910s andand 1920s Surgem a Boeing, Lockheed, Stinson, Douglas, Fokker, Fleet;

Altos índices de acidentes;

Imagem: atividade perigosa e pouco confiável.

Fonte: Cavali, S.G.M.Notas de Aula, “Certificação Aeronáutica”

PE-Safety ITA, 2006

1930s,1930s, Antes da WWII - nenhum programa formal de segurança existia...

WWII, Estatística dos aliados: perdas em combate = acidentes

DE ONDE VIEMOS, 1920s – 1940s


Por que havia tantos acidentes?

Quem opera? Como opera? Quem faz a manutenção? Como faz a manutenção? O produto operado é seguro? Como é fabricado esse produto? O acidente pode se repetir?


PE-Safety ITA, 2006



1950s Primeiro ‘approach’ pelo CAA em ‘auto-land’ systems

então em desenvolvimento.

1960s

Acidente da Apollo I (1967): NASA assume seu papel;

CAA – ‘draft’ da revisão do BCAR Section D (UK);

FAA ‘special conditons’ para sistemas críticos de ‘wide-bodies’.

Fora da aviação: desenvolvimento de conceitos e metodologias similares para usinas nucleares.

Fonte: Serra, P.R.F.Notas de Aula, “Safety Assessment”

PE-Safety ITA, 2007

DE ONDE VIEMOS, 1950s & 1960s

Comet


1970s FAA emite Ammd. 23 ao FAR 25 introduzindo o § 25.1309;

Países europeus desenvolvem o JAR, formalizando o critério de análise de sistemas;

FAA emite AC (Advisory Circular) depois de 11 anos de discussão.

1990s

Novos projetos: Boeing 777, A-320/330/340, Regionais(EMBRAER 145, Canadair etc ) oferecendo aplicação sistemáticados métodos de projeto;

Novas experiências no campo da automação, ‘software’ e

interface homem-máquina ( ‘fly-by-wire, digital systems’ etc).

1980s Primeiras aplicações: Boeing 757/767, Airbus para os regionais

A300/310, Regionals

Acidente do Space Shuttle Challenger: `decision-making process´

Fonte: Serra, P.R.F.Notas de Aula, “Safety Assessment”

PE-Safety ITA, 2007

DE ONDE VIEMOS, 1970s - 1990s


Regulamentação: Primeiras Iniciativas

Necessidade de uma organização responsável por assegurar

que a atividade aérea se realize dentro de níveis de

segurança de vôo coerentes com a tecnologia disponível e

com a operação;

1926: Department of Commerce (EUA)---a Federal

policy setting commercial aeronautics to be ruled to it;

1938: Civil Aeronautics Authority (EUA)---Bureau of Air

Commerce transferred to CAA;

1944: Convenção de Chicago (EUA)---criação da ICAO.Fonte: Cavali, S.G.M.

Notas de Aula, “Certificação Aeronáutica”PE-Safety ITA, 2007



Warsaw Convention and Protocols (October 12, 1929) ---

legal framework for carriage of passengers, luggage and

cargo;

International Civil Aviation Conference (December 7, 1944) -

-- Government responsibilities;

Montréal Convention (May 29, 1999) --- ammendment to the

Warsaw Convention for for the Unification of Certain

Rules for International Carriage (mainly liability issues).

World’s Decisions

Civil Aviation Conventions - Important Milestones


Regulamentação: Primeiras Iniciativas

Convenção de Chicago (EUA)---December 1-7, 1944


¶ Iniciativa: Estados Unidos da América¶ 54 nations attended¶ Purpose:

"make arrangements for the immediate

establishment of provisional world air

routes and services"; and

"to set up an interim council to collect,

record and study data concerning

international aviation and to make

recommendations for its improvement,“ and

"discuss the principles and methods to be

followed in the adoption of a new aviation

convention."


Anexos à Convenção de ChicagoAnexos à Convenção de Chicago

Annex 1 – Personnel Licensing

Annex 2 – Rules of the Air

Annex 3 - Meteorological Service for

International Air Navigation

Annex 4 – Aeronautical Charts

Annex 5 – Units of Measurement to

be used in Air and Ground Operations

Annex 6 – Operation of Aircraft

Annex 7 – Aircraft Nationality and

Registration Marks

Annex 8 – Airworthiness of Aircraft

Annex 9 – Facilitation

Annex 10 – Aeronautical

Telecommunications

Annex 11 – Air Traffic Services

Annex 12 – Search and Rescue

Annex 13 – Aircraft AccidentInvestigation

Annex 14 – Aerodromes

Annex 15 – AeronauticalInformation Services

Annex 16 – EnvironmentalProtection

Annex 17 – Security –Safeguarding International Civil Aviation against Acts of UnlawfulInterference

Annex 18 – The Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods By Air


EstruturaEstrutura dada SegurançaSegurança de de AviaçãoAviação, , BrasilBrasil

Estrutura Legal

PORTARIA No. 453/GM5 (1991)

RBHA, NSCA, IAC

Procedimentos (MPH, CI, PA, PT, Policy Files)

CF, CBAer (1986) GOVERNO

MD

ANAC

ANAC-GGCP


PE-Safety ITA, 2009


Acordos Bilaterais de Segurança de Vôo (1976 - )

USA (1976)USA (1976)+ IP (2004)+ IP (2004)

Chile (1995)Chile (1995)Ecuador (2005)Ecuador (2005)

China (2000)China (2000)+ IP (2000)+ IP (2000)

Japan (2001)Japan (2001)

Bilateral AgreementBilateral AgreementProtocol of UnderstandingProtocol of UnderstandingMemorandum of UnderstandingMemorandum of UnderstandingArrangementsArrangementsImplementation ProceduresImplementation Procedures

Germany (1987)Germany (1987) France (2001)France (2001) Lithuania (2003)Lithuania (2003)Spain (1995)Spain (1995) + + EurocopterEurocopter (2001)(2001) Macedonia (2003)Macedonia (2003)Belgium (1995)Belgium (1995) + + EmbraerEmbraer (2001)(2001) Malta (2003)Malta (2003)JAA (1997)JAA (1997) Bulgaria (2003) Bulgaria (2003) Norway (2003)Norway (2003)Russia/CIS (1997)Russia/CIS (1997) Croatia (2003)Croatia (2003) Poland (2003)Poland (2003)

+ IP (1998)+ IP (1998) Czech Rep (2003)Czech Rep (2003) Romania (2003)Romania (2003)Italy (2000)Italy (2000) Estonia (2003)Estonia (2003) Slovakia (2003)Slovakia (2003)

+ IP (2000)+ IP (2000) Hungary (2003)Hungary (2003) Turkey (2003)Turkey (2003)Iceland (2003)Iceland (2003) EASA (2004)EASA (2004)

ACORDOS BILATERAISCELEBRADOS PELA

AUTORIDADE DA AVIAÇÃO CIVIL BRASILEIRA

Fonte: Cavali, S.G.M.,Notas de Aula, “Certificação Aeronáutica”

PE-Safety ITA, 2004


Código Brasileiro de Aeronáutica

CBAer: “Art. 1º O Direito Aeronáutico é regulado pelos Tratados, Convenções e Atos Internacionais de que o Brasil seja parte, por este Código (CBAer) e pela Legislação Complementar.” (18 de dezembro de 1986)

Comissão Especial aprova novo Código Brasileiro da Aeronáutica (23 de junho de 2010)

Está pronta para ir ao plenário a alteração de mais de 50 artigos do Código Brasileiro de Aeronáutica. O texto foi aprovado nesta quarta (23/6), por unanimidade, em uma comissão especial que analisava as mudanças.A aviação brasileira pode ter novas regras ainda este ano, caso seja aprovada a proposta que modifica o Código Brasileiro de Aeronáutica.Uma das mudanças propostas é o aumento do limite de participação do capital estrangeiro nas empresas aéreas, que hoje é de 20% e pode passar a 49%. O texto também autoriza o leilão de aviões abandonados nos aeroportos. Para os passageiros, a maioria das mudanças já está em vigor por meio de decretos da Anac (Agência Nacional de Aviação Civil). Uma delas é a redução do tempo de espera para que a companhia seja obrigada a dar alimentação aos passageiros, em caso de atraso. Uma novidade é que as empresas poderão oferecer ao passageiro que não puder viajar a chance de transferir o bilhete a outra pessoa sem pagar multa. Mas a grande mudança é que os futuros presidentes da República terão que dar satisfações ao Congresso Nacional sobre as políticas públicas que pretendem colocar em prática no setor da aviação. A expectativa do relator é de votar as mudanças no plenário até a segunda quinzena de agosto.


Certificação Aeronáutica

Históriada Certificação

Aeronáutica

DESIGN CERTIFICATION

COMMUTER CAT AIRPLANESRBHA 23 + 135

TRANSPORT CAT AIRPLANESRBHA 25 + 135

TRANSPORT CAT AIRPLANESRBHA 25 + 121

TRANSPORT CAT HELICOPTERRBHA 29 + 135

MULTIENGINE AIRPLANESNORMAL CAT - RBHA 23 + 91

SINGLE ENGINE AIRPLANESN/U/A CAT - RBHA 23 + 91

NORMAL CAT HELICOPTERRBHA 27 + 91

RESTRICTEDCAT AIRCRAFT

SAFETY

LEVEL

NUMBER OF EXPOSED PERSONS (*)

EXPERIMENTALAIRCRAFT

(*) (ON GROUND AND AIR)

Históriada Certificação

Aeronáutica


AGENDA


Pilares;







Status Atual




Mensagem Final


O mundo durante a Guerra Fria

Fonte: Richard R. LuchtNotas de Aula, “Ambientes de




FRAGILE1920-1970

a. Individual Risk Managementb. Accident Investigation

SAFE

19701920 2000 Today

a. Design & Regulationb. Incident Investigation

ULTRA SAFE2000-Today

a. Business Mgtb. Data Based Rec’d

1970-2000

ACCIDENTS

EVENT HISTORY Dan Marino, March 2004 Mexico City

Fonte: Michael L. BarrNotas de Aula, “Aviation Safety Management Systems”

PE-Safety ITA, 2008


O Ambiente de Negócios da Empresa/Instituição

ONDE ESTAMOS: Efeitos da Globalização



Ambiente

Stakeholders

Marketing

Legislação

CulturaGoverno

Dem

ogra

fia

Clima

ConcorrenteCliente

Stakeholders

Branding

Operações

TI

Política

Finanças

RH

Economia Tecnologia


O Efeito da GlobalizaçãoFonte: Richard R. Lucht

Notas de Aula, “Ambientes de Negócios da Aviação: uma Perspectiva Estratégica”PE-Safety ITA, 2009



O Efeito da GlobalizaçãoFonte: Richard R. Lucht

Notas de Aula, “Ambientes de Negócios da Aviação: uma Perspectiva Estratégica”PE-Safety ITA, 2009

Tráfego Aéreo InternacionalTráfego Aéreo InternacionalTráfego Aéreo Internacional




Was air travel really that great in the past? Here's a comparison of different eras in aviation.

($4 billion)$409 million($25 million)($42 million)Net profit (loss) for U.S. airlines

0.0981.3021.6532.868Fatal accidents per 100,000 departures

10.1 million5.4 million3.9 million2.3 millionNumber of flights

769.5 million171.9 million60.3 million16.7 millionPassengers on U.S. airlines

$298N/A$785$1,447New York-Los Angeles one-wayfare*

$0.14$0.34$0.44$0.57Average price to fly one mile*

500-600 mph500-600 mph300 mph150 mphTypical cruise speed

Boeing 737; AirbusA320

Boeing 707 and 727; Douglas DC-8 and DC-9

Lockheed Constellation; Douglas DC-6 and DC-7

Douglas DC-3; Convair 240

Typical plane

2009196919591949

WSJ Time Travel Article Thursday, July 22, 2010Author: Scott McCartneySource: WSJ reporting


Fonte: Richard R. LuchtNotas de Aula, “Ambientes de Negócios da Aviação: uma Perspectiva Estratégica”

PE-Safety ITA, 2009

SETOR AEROESPACIAL EUA

Durante os anos 1990, mais de 50 empresas se consolidaram no que

hoje é conhecido como as “5 Grandes”.

↓Objetivos:

Redução da capacidade ociosaGanhos de Escala

Grupos Resultantes

• Lockheed Martin• Boeing• Raytheon• Northrop Grumman• General Dynamics



Para Onde Vamos: Desafios Maiores

Cenário Mais Amplo da Aviação

Certificação e Aeronavegabilidade Continuada das aeronaves

não-tripuladas (UAVs)---”man out-of-the loop”;

Futuro da Propulsão Aeronáutica: solução de compromisso

entre oferecer tecnologia de ponta e diminuir o consumo

(DOC) e a poluição atmosférica;

Supersonic “BizJets”: novos cenários, imensos desafios

ecnológicos, novos procedimentos operacionais (“lift-off”,

“landing”, “high altitudes”);

Advento dos “Personal Jets”: Como vai ficar o Controle do

Espaço Aéreo? Disciplina Consciente?

BAe 146 Hit London City




Compound helos

X-2 flight test, new world record (~ 417 km/h, 225 kt), July 27, 2010




Electric Engines

S-300C, Oshkosh 2010 (less noise, vibration & C-emissions)



Cenário Brasileiro

Operações “offshore” (logística, integração, tecnologia,

visão prospectiva);

Integração dos modais aéreo e aquático na Amazônia Brasileira:

um “must” (procedimentos a serem importados da

aviação “offshore”)”. E se acontecer a guerra da água?

Crescimento do volume do tráfego aéreo internacional, com

reflexos aqui: ampliação do número e modernização dos

aeroportos, co-gestão efetiva dos diversos anexos da ICAO;

Eventos internacionais que vão colocar o Brasil na alça e na

massade mira... (World Cup 1914 and Olympic Games 1916)


Human Factors Regulations

ONDE ESTAMOS, 2000s

Regulations and policies in the U.S. for HF design requirements and

considerations

Given the significant harmonization efforts between the U.S. and EASA, many of

these regulations are currently, or will be, similar or duplicates of one

another.

Although in aircraft certification it focus on the equipment and minimum

performance standards or requirements, it’s also needed to consider

airspace-related design criteria, such as approach procedures, air traffic

procedures, as well as operational procedures and standards, including

training or limitations based on visibility or the type of operation.

Specifically, what makes it a good design?

Partial listing of FAA Regulations in Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).

The list is not comprehensive, but identifies examples of common human

factors topics in aircraft certification.

CRM



ONDE ESTAMOS, 2000s

Exceptional Pilot Capabilities--- regulations prohibit aircraft characteristics

that would require exceptional pilot skill, alertness, strength or other

capabilities.

When showing compliance with these regulations, applicants must carefully

consider related human factors issues.

Advisory Circulars that provide guidance in adhering to and showing a means

of compliance in meeting the requirements set forth by the regulations

OBS: With specific technologies, such as Synthetic Vision Systems or

Data Link, there are also HF elements contained in the

documents. However, the listing is of more general

requirements.



ONDE ESTAMOS, 2000s

Human Factor’s Policies: most important under FAA’s viewpoint are highlighted.

Review of critical regulation addressing Human Fators:CS 25.1302, been a regulation in Europe since 2007

Intended to address the broad range of human errors resulting from FC interaction with equipment or issues with design of controls,information or equipment behavior (Although it is a Part 25 regulation, it is being invoked by EASA in the U.S. currently for Part 23 aircraft as well---e.g., Cessna, Cirrus---).

Timeline¶ Reg: NPRM due out November 2010, and the accompanying Advisory

Circular (AC) draft will be posted for review simultaneously. ¶ Reg/AC similar to EASA: CS 25.1302 has been a regulation/AC since

2007¶ EASA is also invoking 1302 for Part 23 aircraft (e.g., Cessna, Cirrus), but

not for rotorcraft (Parts 27/29) to our knowledge yet.

HF Reg pdfHF Reg pdf


Para Onde Vamos: NexGen

Origin

NextGen is the term used by the U.S. to represent changes in the national airspace, and Congress appointed/tasked a group/coalition of agencies to carry out the high level planning of this (listed on next page). This way all agencies with interests in the outcome can participate and also be responsible. This group is called the Joint Planning and Development Office (JPDO), and it is made up of many sub-committees (systems, airspace, safety etc).

SESAR is the European counterpart to JPDO – and has the same function.

Because the US and Europe are making efforts to harmonize on everything possible, you will find the goals for both are very similar, if not the same.



Definition

NextGen is an umbrella term for the ongoing, wide-ranging transformation of the National Airspace System (NAS). At its most basic level, NextGen represents an evolution from a ground-based system of air traffic control to a satellite-based system of air traffic management. This evolution is vital to meeting future demand, and to avoiding gridlock in the sky and at our nation’s airports.

NextGen will open America’s skies to continued growth and increased safety while reducing aviation’s environmental impact.

We will realize these goals through the development of aviation-specific applications for existing, widely-used technologies, such as the Global Positioning System (GPS) and technological innovation in areas such as weather forecasting, data networking and digital communications. Hand in hand with state-of-the-art technology will be new airport infrastructure and new procedures, including the shift of certain decision-making responsibility from the ground to the cockpit.



Key Performance Targets for 2020

1) Enable a threefold increase in capacity;

2) Improve safety by a factor of 10;

3) Reduce by 10% the environmental impact per flight;

4) Cut ATM costs by 50%. NexGen docs

When fully implemented, NextGen will allow more aircraft to safely fly

closer together on more direct routes, reducing delays and providing

unprecedented benefits for the environment and the economy through

reductions in carbon emissions, fuel consumption and noise.

Definition (cont.’d)



Goals Comparison: FAA and EASA NexGen Capabilities

FAA (US)

Collaborative Capacity Management – will balance forecasted airspace andairport demand and utilization in collaboration with enterprise stakeholdersthrough proactive strategic planning and automation.

Flow Contingency Management – will provide optimal, synergistic, and safe strategic flow initiatives

Efficient Information Sharing – will improve information required for aviation regulation, situation awareness, and enhanced decision making

Effective Trajectory Management – will minimize the frequency andcomplexity of aircraft conflicts within the flow through trajectory negotiations, and adjusting individual aircraft trajectory and/or sequencing when resourcecontention requires




FAA (US)

Flexible Airport Facility and Surface Operations – will reallocate orreconfigure the airport facilities and surface assets to accommodate increasingpassenger and cargo demand levels

Flexible Separation Management – will estimate and maintain safe separation minima from other aircraft, vehicles, protected airspace, terrain, weather, etc; predict conflicts and identify resolutions in real time to accommodate increasing capacity demands and traffic levels using automationwhile applying reduced separation standards

Integrated Regulations and Risk Management – provide appropriate, effective, and scalable solutions to mitigate environmental impacts, and safety and security risks




SESAR (EASA – European)

Taking full advantage of existing and newly developed technologies, SESAR’s

target concept relies on a number of key features applicable to all aircraft:

¶ The notion of “trajectory-based operations” which will improve

dramatically the predictability and precision of operations (includes 4D

trajectories).

¶ A rolling network operation plan taking into account real time situations

including weather, and traffic evolution.

¶ The introduction of an Air Traffic Management intranet, including aircraft,

which will enable all actors to have full access to the right information

at the right time (this is where they introduce the use of SWIM).




SESAR (EASA – European)

Taking full advantage of existing and newly developed technologies, SESAR’s

target concept relies on a number of key features applicable to all aircraft

(cont.’d):

¶ The full integration of ground activities into the Air Traffic Management

processes.

¶ Increased automation support to air traffic controllers and pilots,

enabling them to concentrate on high added value activities.

¶ Increased environmentally-friendly operations at airports, enabling

greener trajectories whilst maximizing the use of existing runways.


Para Onde Vamos: HF & NexGen

Plan for JPDO (Joint Planning Development Office)’s Safety Group (*)

(*) JPDO is a US office responsible for NextGen at an overall planning level


http://www.ntsb.gov/Recs/mostwanted/federal_issues.htm

Para Onde Vamos: NTSB Most Wanted

Improve Oversight of Pilot ProficiencyAction Needed by The Federal Aviation Administration

Require Image Recorders Action Needed by The Federal Aviation Administration

Improve the Safety of Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Flights Action Needed by The Federal Aviation Administration

Improve Runway Safety Action Needed by The Federal Aviation Administration

Reduce Dangers to Aircraft Flying in Icing ConditionsAction Needed by The Federal Aviation Administration

Improve Crew Resource Management Action Needed by The Federal Aviation Administration

Reduce Accidents and Incidents Caused by Human Fatigue in the Aviation Industry

Action Needed byThe Federal Aviation Administration

http://www.ntsb.gov/recs/mostwanted/aviation_issues.htm


Global Aviation Safety Roadmap

Ação Estratégica para o Futuro da Segurança de Aviação

(inspirada pela ICAO)

Ind

ust

ryS

afe

ty S

trate

gic

Gro

up

(IS

SG

)

¶ EADS Airbus

¶ Boeing

¶ Airports Council International (ACI)

¶ Civil Air Navigation Services Organization (CANSO)

¶ International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Association (IFALPA)

¶ Flight Safety Foundation (FSF)

(coordinated by International Air Transport Association, IATA)

7th Air Navigation Commission (ANC) Industry Meeting, May 2005



Ação Estratégica para o Futuro da Segurança de Aviação(inspirada pela ICAO)

¶ Entendimento da situação

¶ Aceitação da responsabilidade

¶ Comprometimento com a ação

¶ Estratégias e alvos claros

Lid

era

nça

em

S

eg

ura

nça Governos e

Estados

¶ Trazer o Conceito da Margem para o “Mainstream”

Ajudar na Orientação das Normas e sua

ImplementaçãoIndústria

¶ Atingir além do projeto e da tecnologia

Penetrar na Gestão e na Cultura da

Aviação¶ O imperativo moral para a AÇÃO no sentido da redução ainda

maior da taxa de acidentes torna-se auto-evidente, com

benefícios operacionais imensos e a garantia da continuidade de

negócios (alvo de atenção constante)



Ação Estratégica para o Futuro da Segurança de Aviação(inspirada pela ICAO)

O Aviation Roadmap visa a atingir a meta de redução das taxas globais de acidentes na aviação comercial no curto e médio prazos por meio de parcerias, através de um enfoque segmentado (2005).

METAS

COMPONENTES ESSENCIAIS

Part 1 - A strategic action plan for future aviation safety:Basic framework for correcting inconsistencies and areas of weakness in 12 focus areas.

Part 2 - Implementing the Global Aviation Safety Roadmap:Priorities and specific coordinated actions to be undertaken by industry in order to reduce risk and improve safety worldwide (ONGOING PROCESS…).

Global Aviation Safety Roadmap docs


Part 1 – Basic framework for correcting inconsistences (2005)

ESTADOS

REGIONS

Ação Estratégica para o Futuro da Segurança de Aviação

Ind

ust

ry(*

)

(*) Airlines / Operators, Airports, ANSPs, MROs, Manufacturers

Inconsistent implementation of international standards Inconsistent regulatory oversight Impediments to reporting of errors and incidents Ineffective incident and accident investigation

Inconsistent coordination of regional programmes

Impediments to reporting and analyzing errors and incidents Inconsistent use of safety management systems (SMS) Inconsistent compliance with regulatory requirements Inconsistent adoption of industry best practice Non-alignment of industry safety strategies Insufficient number of qualified personnel Gaps in use of technology to enhance safety



IMPORTANTÍSSIMO: investir em educação e capacitação

Para todos os desafios a frente, TEMOS DE CAPACITAR as

pessoas, nosso MAIS VALIOSO ATIVO!

CAPITAL HUMANORECURSO HUMANO

“know why”“know how” “versus” / “and”

estado-da-arteestado-da-prática “versus” / “and”

Aeronautical Engineering Knowledge


AGENDA


Pilares;







Status Atual




Mensagem Final


O COMO: Visão Sistêmica

Fonte ESSENCIAL: Lições Aprendidas com os setores HRO !!!

“The systems perspective first became popular within HRO's or High Reliability Organizations, such as in the chemical or nuclear industry, where there is high risk that must be minimized, controlled, and monitoriedwith much more delicacy and diligence than for other types of organizations. For example, a bank may benefit from adopting the systems safety perspective, but there are usually not lives at stake - and they usually consider this a part of OSHA - or health and chemical safety regulations, versus a management perspective. In fact, this is why WMATA, the Metro Rail system in DC has been done so far behind... They considered safety management in a very narrow light - only related to employee actions on the job (e.g., use of chemicals, walking the rails for repair etc). They didn't see what management had anything to do with it aside from purchasing the appropriate equipment for employee use” (August 3, 2010)”

(interview, Dr. Katherine Andrea Lemos, August 3-4, 2010)




The Systems Safety perspective or way of thinking has permeated the aviation safety industry in the following ways:

¶ Accident investigation: systems perspective in determining the cause of the accident and in submitting recommendations that address not simply the operator (front line) actions, but all of the contributing factors of the surrounding environment, to include the immediate environment (equipment design and social interactions), operator policy and organizational culture in enforcing and reinforceing behaviors consistent with management priorites, the regulatory environment, and the economic environment (you could add here).

¶ Design: Systems engineering perspective that includes human-in-the-loop methodology to test and improve design prior to production.





The Systems Safety perspective or way of thinking has permeated the aviation safety industry in the following ways (cont.’d):

¶ Production: Feedback from floor personnel up to management to improve process and safety of such.

¶ Operations: Priorities consistent with safety given competing models framework (economics versus safety) and devotion in enforcement.

¶ Regulations: Systems approach to design and to flight standardsregulations for initial concept development and continued operational safety to include certification, production, operational standards, and maintenance - all geared towards system measurement and improvement.

¶ Safety Management Systems: The overaching framework for operators, maintenance organizations, manufacturers, and regulators, to address safety from a comprehensive perspective.





What does “SMS” really represent? A comprehensive approach - a living approach that is updated according to the needs and findings of the organization/agency. It’s not a fading away approach…

As an organized institution, aviation industry has ICAO, and they were the first to call for SMS to be implemented and adopted - brought over from success in the HRO industries to the aviation industry.

The medical field is following suit, but is still far behind aviation. And of the transportation modes, aviation is light years above the others (including transportation of hazardous materials, which is handled by NTSB. CSB handles hazardous materials that are stationery, as at a plant).

Systems Safety doc



Prof. DONIZETI de Andrade, Ph.D.

Comando-Geral de Tecnologia Aeroespacial (CTA)

Instituto Tecnológico de Aeronáutica (ITA)

Cursos de Mestrado Profissional e Especialização em Segurança de Aviação e

Aeronavegabilidade Continuada (MP e PE-Safety)

Praça Mal do Ar Eduardo Gomes, no. 50

Vila das Acácias

12228-900 São José dos Campos, SP

Brasil

Fone/Fax: (+12) 3947-6984; (+12) 9127-9535

[email protected]

MP-Safety & PE-Safety:

(1) Tânia Maria Rachnik Rennó: [email protected], (+12) 9191-7573;

(2) Aline Arrojo de Souza: [email protected], (+12) 9188-9236

CONTATOS

segurança de aviação - importância, evolução...

Documents