Category: Blog

Following the IATA World Data Symposium which took place in Dublin in February, we share the Comply365 take on some of the key trends emerging from the conference sessions and discussions with airlines at the event. The IATA WDS theme ‘Digital skies, unleashing the power of Data in Aviation’ explored the latest innovations in data that are transforming the world of aviation.

Here is the Comply365 take on some of the most important themes from IATA WDS:

Real-Time Data for Real-Time Decisioning
Supplying the pilot with pertinent information to aid their decision-making process combining data from different systems that empowers the pilot to make more informed data-driven decisions over and above what aircraft instruments are displaying. 

Rapid digital decisioning is essential to the future of the connected, digital first airline. Every airline has data that holds critically important information that could transform their performance. But accessing, managing and using it can be a huge problem, especially when it’s stored in multiple formats across different departments, making it hard to identify, investigate, analyse and share in a productive and proactive way.

Sophisticated data analytics and digital decisioning tools are an absolute must to provide airlines with intuitive, intelligent data access and visualization, helping them to make faster data-driven decisions. This is something we are laser focused on at Comply365 with PureIntel – which has simplicity of data access, a highly intuitive user experience and speed to insight at its core.

Data Silos Need to be Addressed
Data silos across the airline persist and the need for integration with existing and new systems needs to be advanced. While airlines continue to have these data silos, opportunities to drive efficiencies via a 360 view of the operation will be missed.

Combining Data Provides the True Value
Airlines are increasingly recognizing that while individual data sets from various operational areas can offer useful insights on their own, the real value emerges when these disparate data sources are integrated and analyzed collectively. By combining data from different domains—such as operations, safety, and training—airlines can uncover deeper insights that would not be possible through isolated data sets. These areas are not only interconnected but are also critical to the smooth, efficient functioning and enhanced safety of airline operations. For instance, operational data might provide insights into training needs and potential safety risks, and training data can shed light on the operational readiness and effectiveness of crew members. When these datasets are combined, airlines can identify patterns and correlations that lead to more informed, data-driven decisions that enhance performance, minimize risks, improve training programs, and ultimately create a safer and more efficient flying experience. This holistic approach ensures that airlines are not just responding to isolated issues but are proactively addressing challenges across interconnected operational domains, maximizing both efficiency and safety.

Prioritization of Data Projects – Where to Invest?
Data analysts in airlines are operating in an uncertain environment – they are unsure which data projects will reap the best ROI and how to identify important data points amongst the noise. Many airline data projects fail because they start with too big of a scope and it takes too long to show the value of advanced analytics. This also presents an exciting opportunity for a data product that unearths the relevant data to drive a desired outcome for example improving operational efficiency, improving aircraft throughput etc. There is a clear demand for data products that can distill vast amounts of complex information into actionable insights, focusing on the most relevant data points that drive desired outcomes.

Data Governance Controls for AI
As the volume of data continues to grow at an unprecedented rate and becomes increasingly integrated with AI, establishing trust through robust data governance is more critical than ever. Airlines are taking proactive measures to ensure that they maintain meticulous data governance frameworks alongside a well-defined data strategy. This approach serves as a foundation for demonstrating control over how data is handled and processed, which is especially important as AI becomes a driving force in enhancing decision-making and operational efficiency. By adhering to stringent governance practices, airlines can reassure both customers and business partners that they are responsibly managing sensitive data and applying AI technologies ethically and securely.

While the goal is to leverage AI to enhance teams and supercharge efforts, this must be all while adopting a responsible approach with AI to gain confidence, experience, and gain the trust of the airline users and regulators – which requires transparency, testing, and time. By ensuring transparency and rigor in their data governance practices, airlines can foster confidence in their AI initiatives, creating a balance between technological advancement and responsible stewardship of customer data.

_________________________________________________________________________________________

At Comply365, our ongoing investment in PureIntel data analytics platform is to specifically address many of the above issues. Data is both an opportunity and an ongoing challenge to navigate given the vast data sets available. Being a data-empowered airline is the holy grail and will unlock significant efficiencies.

PureIntel by Comply365 is a dynamic business intelligence and data analytics platform that sets new benchmarks for the speed and ease of data-informed decision making across airline operations and safety. The self-serving data analytics platform enables users to create and distribute critical operational and safety insights with ease, and define data driven alerts for proactive risk management and to increase operational efficiency.

Learn more about PureIntel by Comply365

The years 2020 and 2021 will be remembered as the most turbulent period in the history of the airline industry, marked by unprecedented fluctuations in passenger volumes due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Regaining passenger confidence has become a critical factor for airlines to navigate the ongoing economic challenges and remain competitive in the uncertain years ahead.

Emerging technologies, once sidelined during the previous decade of industry growth, are now being rigorously evaluated for their potential to address crucial COVID-19 challenges. Here are four key technology trends set to transform the aviation industry:

1. Big Data & Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been pivotal in transforming aviation operations during the crisis. AI is being used to optimize flight routes, enhance weather forecasting, and develop virtual assistants for customer queries. Additionally, AI is improving logistics operations, facial recognition systems for security checks, and self-service kiosks with augmented reality.

According to a market survey, 97.2% of aviation companies are deploying big data and AI, with 76.5% leveraging collected data for cognitive learning initiatives. For instance, Southwest Airlines has partnered with NASA to use machine-learning algorithms for safety enhancements, while easyJet employs AI for predictive analysis to offer personalized traveler services.

2. Biometric Technology

The pandemic has underscored the need for frictionless travel, making biometrics a must-have technology. Star Alliance launched an interoperable biometric identity platform in November 2020, and Emirates introduced an integrated biometric path at Dubai International Airport. Etihad has also trialed facial biometric check-in for cabin crew, highlighting the industry’s shift towards seamless passenger experiences.

3. Cybersecurity and the Cloud

Airlines are increasingly aware of the limitations of legacy infrastructure, especially in delivering high-performance enterprise systems and customer-facing applications. A hybrid cloud infrastructure strategy is enabling airlines to scale resources dynamically to meet the demands of the digital age.

The cloud is now seen as the most secure and scalable solution for data management, such as document management for aircraft OEM data. Centralized databases reduce information silos, enhancing security and operational efficiency.

4. Sustainability

Sustainability is a critical focus in climate change discussions, with aviation being a significant contributor to fossil fuel consumption and environmental impact. The pandemic has accelerated the push for decarbonization and green technology investments. Companies like IAG, Japan Airlines, and Qantas are committed to achieving net-zero carbon emissions by 2050, while Finnair aims for carbon neutrality by 2045. Digitization is playing a crucial role in facilitating these sustainability goals.

A Digital Future

The benefits of technology in operations, cybersecurity, and customer experience are already evident and will continue to grow. 2021 marks the era of accelerated digital transformation, with technology becoming an integral part of everyday life across all industries, especially aviation. Airlines must embrace these advancements to enhance their services, gain a competitive edge, and avoid being left behind in the digital revolution.

In aviation, practical drift refers to the gradual deviation of actual performance from designed performance due to factors that may or may not be under an organization’s direct control. This phenomenon can significantly impact an airline’s safety management system. According to ICAO, practical drift is inevitable, primarily due to human factors. However, with robust processes, data analysis, and a strong safety culture, organizations can harmonize these deviations and prevent catastrophic outcomes.

What Causes Practical Drift in Aviation?

Accidents and serious incidents in aviation often result from a combination of seemingly minor, unrelated issues. These latent issues can remain undetected until they converge unexpectedly, leading to a major problem. Practical drift exacerbates these risks by gradually eroding the effectiveness of safety controls.

Key contributors to practical drift include:

• Technology: Systems that do not operate as predicted.
• Procedures: Tasks that cannot be executed as planned under specific conditions.
• Complacency: A lack of vigilance in routine operations.
• Resource inadequacy: Insufficient support equipment or personnel.
• Safety culture: Weaknesses in organizational attitudes toward safety.

By conducting meaningful trend analysis on routine operations, organizations can identify and address these latent issues before they escalate.

The Role of Drift Diagrams in Understanding Practical Drift

A drift diagram visually represents the gradual deviation of operational performance from the baseline (ideal) performance. Initially, systems are designed to follow a straight-line performance trajectory (blue line). However, real-world operations often deviate from this baseline due to external influences, resulting in a “practical drift” (red line).

Figure: A drift diagram showing baseline performance (blue) vs. actual performance (red) over time.

Scott A. Snook, who first proposed the theory of practical drift, argues that drift is inevitable in any system. Organizations must proactively monitor and analyze data to identify leading indicators of drift and implement corrective actions.

Mitigating Practical Drift in Aviation

To combat practical drift, aviation organizations should:

• Leverage Data Analysis: Use advanced analytics to identify trends and anomalies in operational data.
• Conduct Regular Audits: Perform safety audits and observations to detect deviations.
• Foster a Strong Safety Culture: Encourage reporting of near-misses and latent issues.
• Invest in Training: Ensure personnel are competent and motivated to follow procedures.
• Monitor Safety Performance Indicators (SPIs): Track SPIs to assess the effectiveness of safety controls.
• By addressing practical drift early, organizations can prevent minor deviations from escalating into serious incidents.

Practical Drift and Aircraft Drift: A Critical Connection

Aircraft drift—a term often used to describe deviations from intended flight paths—can be influenced by practical drift. For example, outdated technology, procedural gaps, or complacency among pilots can lead to unintended deviations. Understanding the relationship between practical drift and aircraft drift is essential for enhancing aviation safety.

Conclusion

Practical drift is an inherent challenge in aviation safety management. By recognizing its causes, leveraging tools like drift diagrams, and implementing proactive mitigation strategies, organizations can reduce risks and maintain operational excellence. Stay vigilant, analyze trends, and foster a culture of continuous improvement to keep your operations on course.

While the specifics may vary slightly from one organization to another, the core principles of an aviation Safety Management System (SMS) remain consistent. These four components (which in turn are broken down into twelve elements) are listed in ICAO Document 9859 and it is likely that you are already familiar with them, particularly if you have implemented your own SMS by now.

The following article examines how each of these four components should be developing in your organization by asking a number of questions that might be phrased by your NAA inspectors as they seek to determine if your SMS is delivering your stated safety objectives and is improving continuously as part of the Performance Based Oversight objectives discussed in Annex 19, Revision 1.

Policy

• Is your safety policy easily accessible, and is your workforce fully engaged and supportive?
• Do employees understand the importance of hazard identification and safety reporting?
• Is timely and adequate feedback provided to those who report hazards?

These three questions apply across the entire organization and are not confined to Flight Operations. This can only be achieved if management are likewise engaged and empowered to deliver the safety policy. What evidence is available to demonstrate your enterprise approach to safety management? Items such as an increase in voluntary reporting rates for all departments can be used. Furthermore, the establishment of a Just Culture (ASAP in the USA) must be evidenced and must be used by management at all levels.

Risk Management

• Is your safety reporting system user-friendly and easily accessible? Complex systems can deter employees from reporting hazards.
• Are hazard reports acted upon, and is feedback provided to the reporters?
• Are your risk registers up-to-date and accessible to management?
• How do you monitor the effectiveness of risk controls and mitigations?
• Do you have adequate resources to meet the requirements of implemented risk controls?
• Are there processes in place for safety issue risk assessments and management of change?
• Does your risk process consider the broader impact of risks, including financial, reputational, and environmental factors?
• How are risks communicated to the workforce? Are visual tools like Bow Tie diagrams used to simplify understanding?

A primary objective of the risk control process should be to ensure that the appropriate resource is allocated to mitigate identified risks. Ideally, a register of all controls should be maintained alongside the risk register. All identified risks must be accepted by a responsible manager and high-level decisions should be made using risk-based analysis. Finally, there must be suitable processes in place to review and monitor all risks listed in the register as part of the assurance processes.

Assurance

• Are your risk controls implemented and effective?
• Are controls reviewed regularly?
• Is your SMS improving continuously?
• Is your SMS delivering your stated safety objectives?
• Have you agreed to operate to an Acceptable Level of Safety Performance (ALoSP) with your Regulator and can you demonstrate that you are achieving this?

Assurance is a critical component of an SMS. Safety Performance Indicators (SPIs) and Safety Performance Targets (SPTs) are typically used to meet these requirements, as detailed in Document 9859 (Issue 4). Without these, it’s challenging to demonstrate ALoSP and continuous improvement.

Promotion

Unless the safety policy and its objectives are communicated widely and in a format that is designed to engage all employees, it is unlikely to be effective. Poster campaigns can be useful, but short lived. Management must promote the safety policy continuously. This could be in the form of monthly safety newsletters by fleet managers (which could be a leading SPI if used). Again, this process should be adopted across all departments and whilst safety promotion is often very good in the flight operation:

• Is your safety policy communicated effectively across all departments?
• When was the last time the commercial department participated in a risk assessment or safety meeting?

The quotation below is by William Voss (past CEO of the Flight Safety Foundation). It encapsulates how an effective SMS should function and also demonstrates the need for good safety promotion across an organization:

“Go back to last year’s budget and see if you can find one single instance where information from your SMS caused you to spend money differently to how you had planned. If you cannot find an example of that in your operation you either have an extraordinarily brilliant budgeting process or your SMS is not delivering. I would bet on the latter.”

Beyond the Four Pillars of SMS

To ensure that your organization implements an effective safety management system, you need to be able to continuously monitor each aspect of your system and question whether your implemented processes are as effective as they could be.An effective SMS goes beyond these four principles. It encompasses numerous aspects that airlines must consider to ensure safety and compliance.

In November 2019, revision 1 to ICAO Annex 19 became extant. Consequently, your regulator is likely to start taking a deeper interest in your Safety Management System. Specifically, the need to demonstrate continuous improvement in safety and to show how you are achieving your stated safety objectives will come under increased scrutiny. This is because ICAO will start to audit NAAs to determine their compliance with the new Annex 19 which, in turn, will result in them taking a keener interest in your SMS. How you go about demonstrating that you are meeting these emerging requirements starts with your organisation’s safety policy and its objectives.

Progress made in the achievement of stated objectives should be monitored and reported on a regular basis. This is accomplished through the identification of safety performance indicators (SPIs), which are used to monitor and measure safety performance. Through the identification of SPIs, information obtained will allow senior management to be aware of the current situation and support decision- making, including determining whether actions are required to further mitigate safety risks to ensure the organisation achieves its safety goals.

Safety Performance Management Process

The generic safety performance management process is shown below in figure 1 (source: ICAO Document 9859)

Safety data is entered into the process via the Safety Data Capture and Processing System (SDCPS). By using appropriate analysis techniques, the captured safety data can be turned into useful information that can then be used to monitor the organisation’s safety performance. This is achieved by the establishment of appropriate safety objectives and their associated safety performance indicators (SPI). Additionally, captured and analysed safety information will allow management to identify any actions required to maintain a safe operation.

Unless the safety performance management process is communicated to the entire workforce, it will fail to meet its objectives. The safety promotion aspect cannot be overstated, it is vital that all personnel across all departments are informed and engaged in this important process.

Safety performance management helps the organisation to ask and to answer the four most important questions regarding safety of their operation:

• What are the organisation’s top safety risks?
  
• What does the organisation want to achieve in terms of safety and what are the top safety risks that need to be addressed? The organisation’s safety objectives.
  
• How will the organisation know if it is making progress toward its safety objectives? Through SPIs, SPTs and, if practicable, safety triggers.
  
• What safety data and safety information are needed to make informed safety decisions? Including the allocation of the organisation’s limited resources to manage and mitigate identified risks. SDCPS and safety analysis.

Safety Objectives

Safety objectives are the starting point for safety performance management systems. They are brief, high-level statements of the desired safety outcomes to be accomplished. Safety objectives provide direction to the organisation’s activities and should therefore be consistent with the safety policy that sets out the organisation’s high-level safety commitment. They are also useful to communicate safety priorities to the workforce. Establishing safety objectives provides strategic direction for the safety performance management process and provides a sound basis for safety related decision-making.

Safety objectives may be:

• process-oriented: stated in terms of safe behaviours expected from operational personnel or the performance of actions implemented by the organisation to manage safety risk; (e.g. a year on year increase in voluntary reporting) or:
  
• outcome-oriented: encompass actions and trends regarding containment of accidents or operational losses; (e.g. a reduction in the number of unstable approaches per 1000 sectors from 30 to 10 over the next 2 years).

As a general guide, safety objectives should be based on SMART criteria: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant and Time-Bound; e.g. Increase the number of voluntary, safety reports by 100% over the next 4 years. Additionally, a mix of process and outcome objectives should be determined. When senior management define an organisation’s safety objectives, they need to consider the size and complexity of their operation and also the past performance in terms of safety. For example, management may already be aware of a number of areas of concern such as an increased number of runway incursions. The safety objective could be either process orientated such as the establishment of local runway safety teams at each airport in the next year or it could be outcome oriented e.g. a reduction in runway incursions from 10 every thousand movements to 2, over the next 12 months.

Safety Performance Indicators

In order to monitor progress towards achieving the stated safety objectives, an organisation must develop a means to measure performance towards these goals. This is usually in the form of Safety Performance Indicators (SPI). SPIs provide management with an overview of how well the organisation is progressing in achieving its stated safety objectives. There are a number of different types of SPI that could be considered (all are equally valid):

• Quantitative and Qualitative SPIs Quantitative SPIs record a specific measure of an event type or issue. For example, it could be the number of unstable approaches each month. Usually, an organisation will wish to normalise these figures to maintain a “level playing field” month on month. For example, it might be that only half the number of flights are conducted in January compared to July and so the January total of unstable approaches is much less than July. To normalise this data, a more realistic measure might be the number of unstable approaches every 1000 flights. Use of quantitative SPIs is preferred from a safety management standpoint because they return measurable, numeric data that can be presented graphically at each monthly safety meeting.
  
  Qualitative SPIs are equally valid if chosen correctly but they are more difficult to measure and report on. An example of a qualitative SPI could be the improvements in safety culture; this might be monitored by the use of staff surveys.
• Leading and Lagging SPIs Lagging SPIs record things that have already happened. For example, the number of Altitude Busts per month. These SPIs record the more negative outcomes that the safety management team are trying to avoid. Lagging SPIs are very good indicators of long-term trends and they can be tailored to specific areas of concern. For example, the number of runway incursions at airfield XXX.
  
  Lagging SPIs are also very useful for measuring the effectiveness of safety risk mitigations / controls e.g. number of runway incursions at airfield XXX following the installation of illuminated stop bars.
  
  Leading SPIs tend to focus on processes or initiatives that have been implemented to improve safety in the organisation. An example of a leading SPI could be “the number of pilots who have completed Altitude Bust training in the simulator”.

It is important that, when setting SPIs, they are aligned with the organisation’s safety objectives. Furthermore, a mix of leading and lagging SPIs should be used. Primarily, quantitative SPIs will be used because they are easier to monitor and ultimately present during management meetings. Of most importance is that SPIs provide decision makers with relevant safety information such that any decisions made are based on reliable and defensible data. Furthermore, well thought out SPIs will allow for the development of meaningful Safety Performance Targets that will show progress towards the achievement of stated safety objectives.

When defining their SPIs, organisations should try to introduce a mix of leading and lagging indicators. However, the two types of SPI should not (if possible) be defined in isolation. There should be some form of link between the leading SPI and the lagging SPI. This is best explained by reference to the diagram at figure 2 (source: ICAO Document 9859).

Figure 2 shows the relationship between leading and lagging indicators. Of note is the fact that the main SPI (Number of runway excursions/1000 landings) is supported by two other SPIs. There is a leading SPI that accounts for the number of pilots who have received formal training in the issue. Additionally, the organisation has identified that a primary cause of runway excursions is unstable approaches. With this in mind, they have set this as an SPI which will serve as an indicator towards the primary event. These “indicator” issues are often referred to as “pre-cursor events”.

It is important that, when setting SPIs, they are aligned with the organisation’s safety objectives. Furthermore, a mix of leading and lagging SPIs should be used. Primarily, quantitative SPIs will be used because they are easier to monitor and ultimately present during management meetings. Of most importance is that SPIs provide decision makers with relevant safety information such that any decisions made are based on reliable and defensible data. Furthermore, well thought out SPIs will allow for the development of meaningful Safety Performance Targets that will show progress towards the achievement of stated safety objectives.

The contents of each SPI should include:

• A description of what the SPI measures;
• The purpose of the SPI (what it is intended to manage and who it is intended to inform);
• The units of measurement and any requirements for its calculation;
• Who is responsible for collecting, validating, monitoring, reporting and acting on the SPI (these may be staff from different parts of the organisation);
• Where or how the data should be collected; and
• The frequency of reporting, collecting, monitoring and analysis of the SPI data.

To support your SPI dashboard it is essential that the right safety management system software is in place. A well-designed and supported SMS software solution will help safety managers obtain information and data that can support their respective safety management priorities, and thereby provide the wider organisation with a set of SPIs that can be measured and monitored regularly. It will result in a safer airline organisation.

Note: Information in this article is taken from ICAO Document 9859.