SAFTEFAST 2016 User Group Meeting Modeling to Establish
----- SAFTE-FAST 2016 User Group Meeting ----Modeling to Establish Regulatory Limits Capt. Tulio Rodrigues In partnership with: 2/20/2021 SAFTE-FAST 2016 User Group Meeting - Atlanta 1
WHAT`S SCIENCE FOR ? ? ? 2/20/2021 SAFTE-FAST User Group Meeting, Atlanta 2016 2
1. Life Expectancy… 2/20/2021 SAFTE-FAST User Group Meeting, Atlanta 2016 3
2. Life Quality… 2/20/2021 SAFTE-FAST User Group Meeting, Atlanta 2016 4
3. Prognostics… 2/20/2021 SAFTE-FAST User Group Meeting, Atlanta 2016 5
Outline 1) Accidents versus time on duty: is there an universal pattern? 2) Risk analysis: • Fatigue risk from SAFTE-FAST model. • Brazilian Pilots FTL`s proposal. 3) Conclusions 2/20/2021 SAFTE-FAST User Group Meeting, Atlanta 2016 6
Time on Duty… Combining 4 measurements that include several occupations (*) Data provided by Simon Folkard (private comm. ) 2/20/2021 SAFTE-FAST User Group Meeting, Atlanta 2016 7
Time on Duty… Taking an aviation example for real accidents (Goode, 2003) 2/20/2021 SAFTE-FAST User Group Meeting, Atlanta 2016 8
Time on Duty… Fitting non-aviation and aviation data simultaneously So, let’s consider a 12 -hour limit for a continuous duty cycle? 2/20/2021 SAFTE-FAST User Group Meeting, Atlanta 2016 9
Risk Analysis Scenario 1: first late night duty(*) Scenario 1: Crew member checks-in fully recovered Check-in (h) D = 2 h D = 3 h Duty (h) 02: 00 M 1 M 3 10 04: 30 M 5 M 7 10 05: 30 M 9 M 11 12 12: 30 M 13 M 15 13 14: 30 M 17 M 19 12 15: 00 M 21 M 23 12 15: 30 M 25 M 27 11 19: 30 M 29 M 31 12 22: 30 M 33 M 35 11 23: 30 M 37 M 39 10 D: elapsed time between wake-up and check-in (*) “late night duty” indicates that any fraction of the duty may elapse between 0000 and 0600 2/20/2021 SAFTE-FAST User Group Meeting, Atlanta 2016 10
Risk Analysis Scenario 2: second late night duty Scenario 2: Crew Member starts the second work day after completing scenario 1 in the first day. Check-in (h) D = 2 h D = 3 h Duty (h) 02: 00 M 2 M 4 10 04: 30 M 6 M 8 10 05: 30 M 12 12 12: 30 M 14 M 16 13 14: 30 M 18 M 20 12 15: 00 M 22 M 24 12 15: 30 M 26 M 28 11 19: 30 M 32 12 22: 30 M 34 M 36 11 23: 30 M 38 M 40 10 2/20/2021 SAFTE-FAST User Group Meeting, Atlanta 2016 11
Risk Analysis Scenarios 3, 4 & 5: early-starts Scenario 3: Crew Member checks-in fully recovered Check-in (h) D = 2 h D = 3 h D = 4 h Duty (h) 06: 30 M 41 M 43 -- 13 07: 30 M 45 M 47 -- 14 09: 30 M 49 M 51 M 53 14 1 st day Scenario 4: Crew Member in the third consecutive early start Check-in (h) D = 2 h D = 3 h D = 4 h Duty (h) 06: 30 M 42 A M 44 A -- 13 07: 30 M 46 A M 48 A -- 14 09: 30 M 50 A M 52 A M 54 A 14 3 rd day Scenario 5: Crew Member in the sixth consecutive early start Check-in (h) D = 2 h D = 3 h D = 4 h Duty (h) 06: 30 M 42 M 44 -- 13 07: 30 M 46 M 48 -- 10 09: 30 M 52 M 54 12 2/20/2021 SAFTE-FAST User Group Meeting, Atlanta 2016 6 th day 12
Risk Analysis SAFTE-FAST Effectiveness (*) Example for M 1: First night shift with check-in at 02: 00 and wake-up at 0: 00 (*) Runs performed by Lauren Waggoner, Ph. D (IBR) 2/20/2021 SAFTE-FAST User Group Meeting, Atlanta 2016 13
Risk Analysis Interpolated SAFTE-FAST Effectiveness (*) Available at: http: //www. asagol. com. br/files/_dirtecnica/FRMS%20 Report%20 Part%20 II. pdf 2/20/2021 SAFTE-FAST User Group Meeting, Atlanta 2016 14
Risk Analysis Fatigue Risk versus Effectiveness Data points: S. Hursh, T. Raslear, A. Kaye and J. Fanzone, Jr. (2006). (Report No. DOT/FRA/ORD-06/21). Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Transportation. Error bars: Taken as the square root of the absolute number of accidents in each Effectiveness interval. Accidents data provided by Steven Hursh (private comm. ) 2/20/2021 SAFTE-FAST User Group Meeting, Atlanta 2016 15
Risk Analysis Relative Risk during the duty Eave = 78. 92 % 2/20/2021 <R> = 1. 008 SAFTE-FAST User Group Meeting, Atlanta 2016 16
Risk Analysis Effectiveness & Hazard Area The hazard areas (HA) were calculated by the fraction of the duty period with SAFTE-FAST Effectiveness below a threshold of 80%. 2/20/2021 SAFTE-FAST User Group Meeting, Atlanta 2016 17
Risk Analysis Relative Risk & Hazard Area GREEN: LOW RISK AMBER: MEDIUM RISK RED: HIGH RISK Real accidents SAFTE-FAST calculations: • AIA 808 (Guantanamo Bay): Wesensten & Belenky (private comm. ) • Comair 5191: Pruchnicki, Wu & Belenky (2011) 2/20/2021 SAFTE-FAST User Group Meeting, Atlanta 2016 18
Risk Analysis Brazilian Pilots FTL’s proposal (*) CAO-48 (1 or 2 sectors) limited to 12 h (scenarios 2 and 4* with D = 2 hours) Check-in (h) Run Duty time (h) <R> HA (h) 2300 -0459 M 2 10 1. 140 1. 300 0500 -0559 M 10 11 0. 965 0 0600 -0659 M 42 A* 12 0. 928 0 0700 -0759 M 46 A* 12 0. 894 0 0800 -1059 M 50 A* 12 0. 860 0 1100 -1359 M 14 12 0. 876 0 1400 -1459 M 18 12 0. 891 0. 018 1500 -1559 M 26 11 0. 893 0. 018 1600 -2259 M 30 10 1. 079 0. 753 (*) Details at: http: //www. asagol. com. br/files/_dirtecnica/FRMS%20 Report%20 Part%20 II. pdf 2/20/2021 SAFTE-FAST User Group Meeting, Atlanta 2016 19
Risk Analysis Current (- 2/20/2021 Brazilian Pilots FTL’s proposal (*) - -) versus future limits SAFTE-FAST User Group Meeting, Atlanta 2016 20
Risk Analysis Brazilian Pilots FTL’s proposal (*) Safety x Productivity Fatigue Risk As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP) FDT increased to 12 h FDT kept the lowest value between current and future limits FDT decreased to 9 h (minimum in the Project Law 8255/14) 2/20/2021 SAFTE-FAST User Group Meeting, Atlanta 2016 21
Risk Analysis Brazilian Pilots FTL’s proposal (*) Brazilian Proposal – Maximum FDT (FT) Check-in (h) Number of Sectors 1 -2 3 -4 5 6 0000 -0459 9 (8) 8: 15 (7: 15) 7: 45 (6: 45) 0500 -0559 11 (9) 10 (8) 9: 15 (8) 8: 45 (7: 45) 0600 -0659 11 (9) 10 (9) 9: 15 (8) 8: 45 (7: 45) 0700 -0759 12 (9: 30) 12 (9) 11: 15 (9) 10: 45 (9) 0800 -1059 12 (10) 12 (9: 30) 11: 15 (9) 10: 45 (9) 1100 -1359 12 (9: 30) 12 (9) 11: 15 (9) 10: 45 (9) 1400 -1459 10 (9) 9: 15 (8) 8: 45 (7: 45) 1500 -1559 10 (9) 10 (8) 9: 15 (8) 8: 45 (7: 45) 1600 -2359 9 (8) 8: 15 (7: 15) 7: 45 (6: 45) (*) Details at: http: //www. asagol. com. br/files/_dirtecnica/FRMS%20 Report%20 Part%20 II. pdf 2/20/2021 SAFTE-FAST User Group Meeting, Atlanta 2016 22
Conclusions 1. The Hazard Areas (HA) in the second night duties are significantly higher than in the first ones (around 10 times higher). For this reason, we do not recommend takeoff or landing operations within the WOCL in the second successive night (HA of the same magnitude as in the Guantanamo Bay accident); 2. The relative accident risk considering several occupations (office workers, mining, aviation, etc…) doubles as the time on duty increases from 8 to 12 hours. Increasing the time on duty from 12 to 13 hours increases the risk by roughly 40%; 3. We consider important that the States review their prescriptive limits as they represent the first barrier against fatigue risks (ICAO’s Annex 6). A step back may be needed! 2/20/2021 SAFTE-FAST User Group Meeting, Atlanta 2016 23
Acknowledgments v Crew Member National Union (SNA) v Brazilian Civil Aviation Pilots Association (ABRAPAC) v GOL Airline Crew Member Association (ASAGOL) v TAM Airline Crew Member Association (ATT) In Partnership with: q University of São Paulo (USP) q Institutes for Behaviour Resources, Inc Collaborating Stakeholders: ü National Centre of Investigation and Prevention of Aeronautical Accidents (CENIPA) ü National Commission of Human Fatigue (CNFH) Special Thanks to: Steven Hursh (IBR), Lauren Waggoner (IBR), Reid Blank (IBR), Robert Mora (IBR), Gregory Belenky (WSU), Nancy Wesensten (WRAIR) and Simon Folkard (France & Swansea University) Thank you! 2/20/2021 SAFTE-FAST User Group Meeting, Atlanta 2016 24
- Slides: 24