Transcript IOSA Preparation

Job profile and training requirements of
European flight dispatchers
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 1
Agenda
1 General
2 Survey results
3 IOSA Auditing
4 Consequences
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 2
What?
 Dissertation
as part of a Masters Degree Programme in
Air Transport Management
 London
City University
 Title:
“Job profile and training requirements of European Flight Dispatchers”
 Impartial,
not politically motivated
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 3
Who?
 Andreas
 Ex
Cordes, 41 years old
Lufthansa Captain
 Experience
 Licensed
 IOSA
on B747-400, B737, A319/20/21
Flight Dispatcher (Germany)
Lead Auditor and Trainer
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 4
Goals
 Evaluate
the environment of FOO/FDs in Europe and
define a job profile
 Analyze
 What
Operator specific differences
kind of training is required in order to get the job done?
 Assess
the market chances for such a training course
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 5
A word about licenses
 It
is not the purpose of the study to answer the question,
whether FOO/FDs should be licensed
 The
issue is highly political and worth a study of its own
 But:

the study will deliver arguments for the discussion
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 6
Confidentialty
 The
study has not been completed yet
 Content
as presented here is tentative and
shall not be copied and distributed
 EUFALDA
will receive the full paper
as soon as it has been released by the University
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 7
Agenda
1 General
2 Survey results
3 IOSA Auditing
4 Consequences
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 8
Participants
 Questionnaire
has been sent to 140 Operators
 All
sizes, all business models,
all 32 JAA member states
 Feedback
 24
received from 42 Operators
countries covered
 Unfortunately
very little feedback from:
 UK
 Low-Cost Carriers
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 9
Staff numbers
 Survey
 Being
covers the work of 972 Flight Dispatchers
responsible for 1807 aircraft
Staff ratio: 0,54 FOO/FD per aircraft
 Ratio
varies, depending on the type of operation
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 10
Licensing 1
 The
majority is unlicensed
National license:
35,7%
FAA license:
5,5%
Not Licensed:
License issued by
54,9%
another European
country:
3,8%
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 11
Licensing 2
 Small
Operators rely more on unlicensed staff
 FAA License is popular for small operators
Staff licensing vs. fleet Survey 10 A/C 11 to 25 26 to 50
size
average or less
A/C
A/C
> 50
A/C
(most significant values
highlighted)
 Turbo-prop
Not licensed
54,9
84,6%
52,2%
47,5%
55,3%
National license
35,7
3,2%
27,6%
45,1%
38,6%
FAA license
5,5
8,6%
9,3%
6,9%
3,2%
Other EU license
3,8
3,5%
11,0%
0,5%
2,9%
and regional operators have the least licensed
dispatchers
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 12
Hiring 1
 1/3
of all Operators require staff to be licensed
 These Operators prefer a license issued by their authority
- followed by FAA license
- and only then accept other EU country’s licenses
EU licenses are “isolated”
National,FAA and
Only National
EU licenses
license recognized:
recognized:
35,7%
42,9%
Only National and
Only National and
other EU license
FAA License
recogniezd:
recognized: 21,4%
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 13
0%
Hiring 2
 Most
Operators require previous airline experience
Applicants must have previous experience
Large operator (>50 A/C)
77,8%
Small operator (<10 A/C)
75,0%
Network carrier
57,1%
Regional carrier
76,9%
67,9%
Long haul operator
Unlicensed environment
70,4%
64,3%
Average
0,0%
10,0%
20,0%
30,0%
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 14
40,0%
50,0%
60,0%
70,0%
80,0%
90,0%
Hiring 3
 Most
Operators have hiring difficulties
Hiring difficulties
Operators not requiring previous
airline experience
33,3%
Large operator (>50 A/C)
33,3%
11,1%
77,8%
Small operator (<10 A/C)
37,5%
Network carrier
37,5%
23,8%
52,4%
Very difficult
Difficult
Regional carrier
7,7%
76,9%
Long haul operator
Unlicensed environment
32,1%
46,4%
22,2%
Average
51,9%
23,8%
0,0%
10,0%
54,8%
20,0%
30,0%
40,0%
50,0%
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 15
60,0%
70,0%
80,0%
90,0%
100,0%
Hiring 4
 Average
on-the-job training for new-entrants is 3 months
 Unlicensed staff does not receive more on-the-job training
 No compensation of training deficiencies
Operators not requiring previous airline
experience
11,3
Large operator (>50 A/C)
15,3
Small operator (<10 A/C)
9,0
Network carrier
13,5
Regional carrier
16,6
Long haul operator
13,6
Unlicensed environment
10,5
Average
12,7
0,0
2,0
4,0
6,0
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 16
8,0
10,0
12,0
14,0
16,0
18,0
Interfaces/Work environment/Tools
Highlights:
 Primary
interfaces for FOO/FDs are
Cockpit Crew
Flow Management Unit
Line maintenance staff
 FOO/FDs
in small Operators have
more interfaces than others
 Unlicensed
staff uses complex material less often (MEL,
Performance Manuals…)
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 17
Tasks and duties
 Very
detailed data are available in the study
 Only
highlights are presented here
 Activities
are summarized in an “activity index”
For
- Preflight assistance
- Operational Control
- In-flight assistance
- Other activities
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 18
Tasks and duties: Preflight assistance
 Type
of operation determines level of pre-flight assistance
 Unlicensed staff is almost equally involved
Activity index pre-flight
18,4
Large operator (>50 A/C)
18,1
Small operator (<10 A/C)
Executive operator
16,3
Network carrier
17,2
12,0
Regional carrier
18,7
Long haul operator
Unlicensed environment
15,0
Average
16,6
0,0
2,0
4,0
6,0
8,0
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 19
10,0
12,0
14,0
16,0
18,0
20,0
Tasks and duties: Operational Control
 All
groups of FOO/FDs are equally active in operational
control duties
 Exception: executive operators
Activity index operational control
5,4
Large operator (>50 A/C)
4,6
Small operator (<10 A/C)
Executive operator
3,6
Network carrier
5,0
5,1
Regional carrier
4,9
Long haul operator
Unlicensed environment
4,6
Average
4,8
0,0
1,0
2,0
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 20
3,0
4,0
5,0
6,0
Tasks and duties: In-flight assistance
 Level
of in-flight assistance varies by operator type
 Remarkable: Many operators provide flight-following
 Small Operators provide less in-flight assistance
Large operator
(>50 A/C)
Small operator
(<10 A/C)
Executive
operator
Network
carrier
Regional
carrier
Long haul
operator
(most significant values highlighted)
Unlicensed
environment
Average
In-flight assistance
Normal duties
Be available for in-flight assistance at any time
an aircraft is airborne
92,7%
88,9% 100,0% 75,0% 100,0% 100,0% 87,5% 100,0%
Pro-actively monitor weather and other relevant operational
information at any time an aircraft is airborne
78,0%
66,7%
85,2%
66,7%
90,0%
Pro-actively provide crews with relevant operational information while
the aircraft is airborne
80,5%
77,8%
81,5%
83,3%
90,0% 100,0% 62,5%
87,5%
Pro-actively follow the exact in-flight position
of each individual aircraft at any given time (flight-following)
56,1%
48,1%
63,0%
41,7%
65,0%
50,0%
Assist crews in case of in-flight diversions upon request
90,2%
88,9%
92,6%
83,3% 100,0% 80,0%
75,0% 100,0%
Assist crews in case of re-routings (not diversions)
upon request
87,8%
85,2%
88,9%
83,3%
95,0%
80,0%
75,0% 100,0%
Assist crews in-flight in when technical problems occur in a way that a
recalculation of the flight plan becomes necessary
82,9%
77,8%
88,9%
58,3%
95,0%
80,0%
75,0% 100,0%
Initiate emergency response procedures
92,7%
88,9%
92,6%
91,7%
95,0% 100,0% 87,5% 100,0%
Cooperate with crews in case of security threats
95,1%
92,6%
92,6% 100,0% 95,0% 100,0% 100,0% 100,0%
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 21
60,0%
60,0%
62,5% 100,0%
62,5%
Tasks and duties: Other activities
 FOO/FDs
that work for small operators are kept busy with
commercial activities (scheduling, bookings….)
Activity index other activities
1,6
Large operator (>50 A/C)
Small operator (<10 A/C)
4,6
Executive operator
4,6
Network carrier
2,4
4,2
Regional carrier
2,9
Long haul operator
Unlicensed environment
3,8
Average
3,2
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 22
2,0
2,5
3,0
3,5
4,0
4,5
5,0
Agenda
1 General
2 Survey results
3 IOSA Auditing
4 Consequences
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 23
IOSA Audits
 European
Operators have more findings in the Dispatch
section, especially
 Initial
training
IOSA world average
IOSA Europe
and
0,00%
 recurrent
2,00%
4,00%
6,00%
training
IOSA world average
IOSA Europe
0,00%
5,00%
10,00%
15,00%
20,00%
25,00%
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 24
30,00%
8,00%
10,00%
12,00%
14,00%
16,00%
IOSA Audits
 Operational
problems discovered in IOSA audits
Pilots not being aware of the fact that the flight plan might
Lack of a clear definition of the interface
have been processed by untrained individuals and might
between operational controllers and pilots: not have been checked for suitable aerodromes, route
restrictions and performance limitations.
Lack of defined processes and procedures Duties not performed in a standardized manner and
for duties and activities:
without giving regard to operational procedures
Lack of knowledge regarding aircraft
performance, especially engine-out and
depressurization scenarios
No route analysis undertaken to ensure that aircraft are
clear of obstacles at all times. Several routes found
inappropriate over the alps, especially for turboprop
aircraft.
Lack of knowledge about all weather
operations
Alternate airports filed that were unsuitable. No awareness
that U.S. minima have to applied in the U.S., which differ
from JAR-OPS minima.
Unclear definition of duties for the
emergency case
Personnel not well prepared for their roles as described in
the emergency response plan.
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 25
IOSA Audits
 IOSA
Auditing is extremely difficult in the European
environment because
 U.S. and Europe are treated with identical standards
 Consequence:
IOSA standards have completely changed in late 2006
 Highlight:
Introduction of the Flight Operations Assistant (FOA)
to help EU carriers meet the standard

EUFALDA is strongly recommended to become familiar
with the new concept !!
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 26
Agenda
1 General
2 Survey results
3 IOSA Auditing
4 Consequences
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 27
Consequences I
 European
FOO/FDs perform work that meets the definition of
ICAO Annex VI in the new version of 2006
But:
 Many FOO/FD are not adequately qualified
 Training
deficiencies are obvious, large spread exists between
groups of Operators
Hence:
 Formal basic dispatch training is needed for all FOO/FDs
Most existing programmes do not meet industry needs
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 28
Consequences II
 Operators
believe that a 3 mth. training would be adequate
Proposed duration of training course in weeks
Operators not requiring previous airline
experience
13,7
17,3
Large operator (>50 A/C)
Small operator (<10 A/C)
5,8
Network carrier
15,3
12,3
Regional carrier
12,8
Long haul operator
Unlicensed environment
10,0
Average
12,2
0,0
2,0
4,0
6,0
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 29
8,0
10,0
12,0
14,0
16,0
18,0
20,0
Consequences III
 Market
chances of such training is limited
because:
 Training is not mandatory in most countries
 Operators are not willing to pay
 FAA training is cheaper and shorter
 Possible
solution:
Minimum training could become mandatory
irrespective of a licensing requirement
 No
change in regulation to be expected
before EASA has full competence
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 30
Thank you!
…
for your attention
and
…
for your support !
In case of questions, please
contact:
[email protected]
28 OCT 2006
© Andreas Cordes
Slide 31