Transcript Document

Military Flight Operations
Quality Assurance (MFOQA)
If you do not observe it, you cannot measure it.
If you do not measure it, you do not understand it.
If you do not understand it, you cannot manage it.
If you do not manage it, it will manage you!
Information Briefing
by
Mr. Jody Creekmore
US Army Aviation and Missile Command
September 2005
1
What is MFOQA?
Military Flight Operations Quality
Assurance (MFOQA) is nothing more
than the proactive and systematic
collection and analysis of operational data
from aircraft for use in the continuous
improvement of flight operations and
readiness, specifically in the areas of
Operations, Training, Maintenance and
Safety (OTMS).
2
Video
3
Current Perspective
•
Current Situation: Fragmented Army Aviation Information System
–
–
–
–
•
Multiple “like” DEMOs/Programs
No Standard for Recording Devices
Proprietary Data Conversion and Analysis Programs
The Army is not fully using Available Aircraft Data
Opportunity: Improve Army Aviation Information System
– Eliminate Duplication of Multiple “Like” Programs
– Standardize Requirements for Recording Devices – Joint Service
Safety Chiefs (JSSC)-Developed Requirements
– Develop Government-Owned Data Conversion and Analysis
Programs
– Use Aircraft Data to Improve Operations, Training, Maintenance,
and Safety by Implementing an MFOQA Program
4
Cost of Army Aviation
CBM
$ $
$
$
$
$
Expensive.
Potential
Opportunity for
Savings.
$ $
$ $
$
$ $
$
$
$
$
Repair Parts – $
Routine Maintenance
$
$
$
$ $
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
System
Safety
$
$ $
$
$
$ $
$
$
$
$
$ $
$
$
$ $
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$ $
Lost Aircraft –
$$ $ $
$
$
$ $
$
Material Failures $ $
$
$
$
$
$ $
$
$
$
$ Lost Aircraft – Human Factors
$ $
Success Story:
$
$ $ $ $
$ $
Rare
Occurrence
$ $
$ $
$ $
Very Expensive!!!
$
$
But, little to No New
MFOQA
Investment
5
Why MFOQA?
Individual Failure
30%
Material Failure
5%
Support Failure
7%
Training Failure
7%
Risk Management
9%
Environment
18%
Other
12%
Leader Failure
12%
Current Aviation Accident Trends
6
Why MFOQA?
“MFOQA can enable leaders to make wiser,
more informed decisions because of the ability
to store, retrieve, analyze and translate
data
into understandable
information
that will give them the
knowledge
derived from virtually thousands of flight hours
of experience.”
7
Why Now?
• In 2000, the Joint Safety Chiefs (JSSC) signed a Memorandum of Agreement
(MOA) stating full support for MFOQA and recommended immediate funding of
MFOQA programs in all services.
• In 2002, the Secretary of Defense directed that initiatives be taken to reduce
the military aircraft mishap rate by 50%.
• In 2004, the Under-Secretary of Defense for Readiness listed MFOQA as one
of his four (4) key initiatives to achieve the SECDEF’s mishap reduction goal.
• In 2004, both the USAF and Army initiated DEMOs (DoD Redirection of
Funding).
• In 2004, the US Navy initiated a DEMO (Funded within the US Navy).
• In 2006, the US Navy will begin an MFOQA Program (Navy Decision).
• In 2006, both the USAF and Army will begin MFOQA Programs (Program
Budget Decision 705).
8
Joint MFOQA
Cooperation
• The US Department of Defense (DoD) has recently and enthusiastically
embraced MFOQA, a program based on the Flight Data Monitoring (FDM)
program conceived and birthed years ago in civil aviation.
• All the US military departments are actively pursuing MFOQA programs to
impact the safe operation of their fleets of fixed-wing and rotary-wing aircraft
and have begun forging relationships and cooperative ventures to share
lessons learned and best business practices.
•
Defense Safety Oversight Committee (DSOC) Safety Technology
Working Group.
•
JSSC Safety Technology Working Group (STWG).
•
JSSC MFOQA Conference in Las Vegas – JUN 05.
•
JSSC DRAFT MOU – TBD.
9
Joint MFOQA
Cooperation
• The USAF has taken lead on developing
MFOQA Program for Fixed-Wing Cargo aircraft.
• The USN has taken lead on developing
MFOQA Program for Fixed-Wing Fighter aircraft
and Crew Debrief Tool.
• The USA has taken lead on developing
MFOQA Program for Rotary-Wing aircraft.
10
International MFOQA
Cooperation
• The US Department of Defense (DoD) is
participating with several other national
militaries, including the UK Ministry of
Defense (MoD), in the cooperative sharing
of information for the purpose of furthering
military rotary-wing safety, including Flight
Data Monitoring or MFOQA.
11
DRAFT DoD MEMO
• Services are waiting for release.
MFOQA MEMO
• Will define MFOQA.
• Will direct the services to incorporate “enabling technologies” where
technically and fiscally feasible.
• Will serve as advance notice of MFOQA Directive – to be published.
12
DRAFT DoD Directive
• Services are waiting for release.
13
Relationship Between
DSC and MFOQA
DSC
MFOQA
AED
Recording
Device
• Solid-Sate
Crashworthy Flight
Data and Voice
Recorder
• VMEP
• HUMS
Data Flow
SOFTWARE
• In Recording
Device
• In Unit Workstation
HARDWARE
• Recording Device
• Downloading
Device, or Transfer
Media
• Workstation to
Process Data
Unit
Workstation
• Process Data
• Unit Debrief Tool
• Package Report
• Package Data
Central Server
PMO
DSC is NOT MFOQA
DSC is Enabling Technology for MFOQA
MFOQA is Primarily Process and Software
Others
USACRC
SOFTWARE
• In Unit Workstation
• In Central Server
HARDWARE
• Unit Wokstation (shared with
the DSC)
• Central Server
14
MFOQA Imperatives
• Must record Voice, and on the same media as Flight Data.
• Voice and Flight Data stored on a “walk away” media with no
actions required other than “eject;” example is PCMCIA Card.
• Flight Data automatically synchronized with Voice.
• Automatic creation of Visualization File; i.e. Desktop Icon that is
opened with a “double click.”
• Visualization File automatically overlayed on actual Terrain Data.
• Crew/Unit Safety Officer/Commander have access to file.
• Simple manipulation of mouse to get “Cockpit View” or “Outside
View.”
• At unit – Store entire file (w/voice) only for short period.
• Higher Level – Except as required, provided Exception Data only
(no voice).
15
Cost
MFOQA ROI
Challenges:
HQ DA Opportunities
Non-Bussed A/C, DSC-Joint Requirements,
NRE, Infrastructure (People & Equipment),
Sustainment, Privacy Rights,
Mindset (“Big Brother”)
Higher-Level Opportunities
Unit Opportunities
Time
16
MFOQA Opportunities –
All Levels
Unit
Higher-Level
HQ DA
Operations
Training
Maintenance
Safety
• G3 OPS Monitoring
• OPS Ready Rates
• OPS Effectiveness
• Army-wide STATS
• Funding Priorities
• Readiness
• Effectiveness
• Funding Priorities
• G4 Monitoring
• CBM
• Funding Requirements
• Funding Priorities
• Readiness
• ASIST INFO
• Risk Management
• Developing Hazards
• Controls Effectiveness
• Proactive Safety Program
• Monitor
• Battalion OPS
• Brigade OPS
• Division OPS
• Training Effectiveness
• Army-wide Standardization
• ATM Effectiveness
• CMTC Rotations
• Documented Standards
• Crew Coordination TNG
• A/C Status for PEO & PMs
• Data for AMRDEC
• ASIST INFO
• Developing Problems
• TBO Verification &
• Accident Reduction
• Human Factors INFO
• ASIST INFO
• Trend Monitoring
• Risk Management
• Controls Effectiveness
• Mission Replay
• Home Station TNG
• Simulator Replay
• Documented Standards
• Aircrew Self Evaluation
• Instructor Pilot Standardization
• Diagnostics
• A/C Status
• Exceedence Monitoring
• HUMS
• HIT Checks
• IETMs
• Mission Planning
• After Action Report (AAR)
• Monitor Operations
• Mission Effectiveness
• Battlefield Visualization
Extension/Reduction
• Accident Reduction
• Risk Management
• Share “Close Calls”
• Safety Standowns
17
MFOQA Opportunities –
Near Term
Operations (“O”)
– Mission Debrief Tool
Training (“T”)
– Web-Based Standardized ATM Maneuvers
• “Gold Standard” Maneuver Library
• “Common Student Errors” Maneuver Library
– Aircrew Self-Performance Tool – Visualization
– Aircrew Coordination Training and Evaluation Tool
– Collective Training Tool – Visualization
Maintenance (“M”)
– Aircraft System and Sub-System Performance Trending Tool
– Near Exceedance Event Detector (“Close Calls”)
– Exceedance Event Detector
– Predictive Maintenance Tool
Safety (“S”)
– “Composite Risk Management” Tool
18
MFOQA DEMO –
Structure
USAAVNC CMD GROUP
MFOQA Program
Development Team
(DCD Lead)
USACRC
RDECOM
MFOQA DEMO
Steering Committee
AMCOM
Demonstration
Westar
PEO-AVN
19
MFOQA DEMO –
Status
• Phase I.
• Period of Performance: JAN 05 – JAN 06.
• Objective: Develop Requirements.
• Contractor: Westar Aerospace.
• Contract Vehicle: Government Services Administration (GSA).
• Funding: Funded.
• Managed by: Steering Committee.
• Accomplishments: User Survey, Debrief Tool, Infrastructure Req. (25% Complete).
• Phase II.
• Period of Performance: JAN 06 – JUL 07.
• Objective: Demonstrate MFOQA in an Operational Unit.
• Contractor: Westar Aerospace.
• Contract Vehicle: GSA.
• Funding: Funded.
• Managed by: Steering Committee.
20
MFOQA DEMO –
Student Comments
• AH-64D AQC Student, “I really get factual feedback on how I am
performing. [I] can’t wait to get this in my unit.
• AH-64D AQC Student, “If this thing had multi-aircraft capability, it
would be great for evaluating our unit collective training.
• AH-64D AQC Student, “[This is] much better than using the video
from the aircraft because you can go directly to the part of the flight
you need to review. I look forward every morning to review [my]
previous day’s performance.”
21
MFOQA Program Status
• Funded by DoD Program Budget Decision.
• Program Manager: PM Aviation Systems (PEO AVN).
• Difficult Decisions Will be Made; i.e. Which DSC?, Which Platforms?, etc.
PBD 705
22
Value of MFOQA
We seek warriors, persons willing to project
themselves and their aircraft and their weapon
systems into a hostile environment with the
purpose of engaging and destroying the
enemy. The people we seek are required to
train and operate in a flight envelope that
comes right up to the border of hazardous
flight. We are obligated to ensure our warriors
know exactly where that border is located ...
MFOQA will help us find that border.
23
Point of Contact
Mr. Jody Creekmore
US Army Aviation and Missile Command
(256) 842-8630, DSN 788-8630
[email protected]
24
MFOQA “Payback”
OH-58D
Practice Autorotation with Turn
While conducting autorotation training in an OH-58D aircraft, the
pilots observed an Engine NP Overspeed. The Multifunction
Display (MFD) confirmed the pilot’s observations. To confirm the
data recorded on the aircraft’s engine history page, the OH-58D
Training Fleet Manager requested the Safety Center download
and analyze both the aircraft’s Digital Source Collector and the
aircraft’s Digital Transfer Cartridge (DTC). The DTC failed in the
download process and provided no information. Analysis of the
DSC data confirmed the pilot’s statements relative to the
incident, specifically, that the aircraft had experienced an Engine
NP Overspeed. The DSC data permitted the maintainer to
conclude that the Engine Module was still serviceable and that
the Engine Module did not require replacement.
MFOQA “Payback”
Engine History Page Does Not
Display Engine Torque
At Time Of NP Overspeed
MFOQA “Payback”
Without Torque
Information,
TM Says “Replace”
MFOQA “Payback”
Engine NP Overspeed (OH-58D, 90-00380)
120.000
110.000
100.000
90.000
DSC Data
Provides Torque
At Time Of
NP Overspeed
80.000
70.000
EngNP_1 93.600
60.000
EngTRQ_1 5.039
50.000
40.000
30.000
20.000
10.000
01
:0
7
01 :50
:0 .7
5
7
01 :52 0
:0 .7
7: 50
01 54
:0 .7
5
7
01 :56 0
:0 .7
7: 50
58
.7
50
0.000
System Tim e
MFOQA “Payback”
With DSC Data,
TM Says
Engine Module
“OK”
Military Flight Operations Quality Assurance
(MFOQA) Demonstration Update
9 Aug 2005
ARMY AVIATION WARFIGHTING CENTER
30
Background
Contract:
• Contract Awarded July 2004
(General Services Administration contract is 1 Year with 4 Option Years)
• Westar is contractor approved via Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB)
• Statement of work developed for Phase I expected to require 18 months
• Funding Received for Option Year (June 2005).
Phase I Demonstration Objectives:
• Identify Operations, Training, Maintenance, Safety (OTMS) user needs
at Ft. Rucker, AL
• Develop a prototype or “brassboard” MFOQA process
• Begin the regular flow of information to the users
• Quantify the results
Phase I Accomplishments:
• Downloaded data from over 200 AH-64D flights
• Animation of maneuvering flight using downloaded data
• Developed ‘poor’ and ‘good’ crew coordination models
• Developed analysis tools to check for tech manual exceedences
• Developed near-exceedences filter for safety and standardization
• Developed/animated ‘gold standard maneuvers’ as maintenance Instructor
Pilot (IP) course training aid
• Developed and instituted tools to assist and assess ‘mentor IP’ process for use
in post mission debrief of new IPs
31
Demonstration Strategy
• Demonstration will not be taken to an operational unit until MFOQA is ready
(MOVE EFFORT TO SYNTHETIC/EXPERIMENTAL ENVIRONMENT)
• Year 2 effort should end NLT August 2006
• DCD will be the lead for the MFOQA demonstration and will manage
funding with input from the Steering Committee
• The role of the Steering Committee is not to be diminished. LTC Knapp will
chair
• DCD will work with the Program Executive Office- Aviation (PEO-Aviation)
to increase their participation. Follow-on MFOQA initiatives, demonstrations,
etc beyond the 2nd Year effort should transition to the PEO
Minimize Unit Disruption - Leverage Experimental Environment
32
Key Areas for Investigation
• Ability of Unit Manpower to Execute Prototype MFOQA Process
• Day-to-Day MFOQA Operations (i.e., Tactics, Techniques, and
Procedures) from Aircraft to Higher Echelon
• Perceived Value of MFOQA Process to Unit Personnel and Higher
Echelon Users
• Recommended Modifications to Unit or Higher Echelon Equipment
to Implement the MFOQA Process
• Recommended Changes to the MFOQA Prototype Process to meet
operational unit requirements
Minimize Unit Disruption - Leverage Experimental Environment
33