The Flight Safety Foundation is back at EBACE 2015 with updates on some of its most recent focused activities. Founded in 1947, FSF (Booth E095) is an independent, non-profit international organization focused on research, education, advocacy and publishing–all dedicated to improving aviation safety at all levels. This year, FSF’s senior director, business development and membership Susan Lausch will be here in Geneva promoting several top-of-mind programs and initiatives for EBACE visitors and participants.

At the head of the list is FSF’s Global Safety Information Project. A pet project of Peter Stein, chairman of FSF’s business advisory committee, the project aims to leverage the benefits of expanded flight data monitoring (FDM). The principles of FDM center on collecting hundreds of parameters of flight data collected from flight data recorders, distilling the information and making it available to participating members for their own analysis. “We’re urging more business aircraft operators to contribute data via FDM recorders and share their data for the greater good,” said Stein, who is passionate about the programs potential to improve business aviation safety

“We’re trying to catch up with the airlines on FDM,” said Stein, explaining that the concept began in the 1970s, when airlines first used the hundreds of parameters of data from flight data recorders to evaluate their flight operations. Using information gleaned from airline fleets enabled management to identify operational issues. “The trend in aviation systems is toward proactive rather than reactive systems, and flight data management programs fit right into that scenario,” said Stein.

So how can data monitoring help? The collected information includes data on engine performance, navigation, airspeeds, bank angles, altitudes, climb-and-descent rates, cabin environment and much more. FDM can be useful for maintenance providers, as well. They can note trends in engine and systems anomalies, incidents of flap overspeeds (flaps being extended at excessive airspeeds), etc. Airlines were able to process information on incidence of unstable approaches, sometimes defined differently by each operator, but involving excessive bank angles at low altitude, high sink rates close to the airport elevation, etc.

Stein is quick to point out that the FDM project is not meant as a program to catch wayward cockpit crews in mistakes. In fact, the data is meant to be “de-identified” early in the collection and collating process. “The idea is to look for trends,” said Stein, enabling operators to gauge their own data as compared with industry standard. Initially skeptical, airline pilot unions no longer object to FDM principles, said Stein. And there are other tangible benefits.

For example, FDM data revealed an unusual number of unstable approaches to the airport in Savannah, Georgia. Upon investigation, officials found that a nearby military operating area topped at 4,000 feet, requiring a steep descent. After negotiation, air traffic control was able to lower the MOA crossing altitude to 3,000 feet, and the unstable-approach issue at dissipated.

Stein and the FSF have a strong position on retaining protection for those who participate in the FDM program, and in fact, for those who participate in any of the safety reporting programs around the world. The FSF’s Safety Information Protection initiative is aimed at defending the anonymity of the sources of safety information. Stein emphasizes the emphasis is not on providing protection from certification action against offending pilots and other personnel (the so-called “get out of jail” card), but rather, to protect the data from being used in civil litigation.

The FSF official cited the example of the Comair takeoff crash in Lexington, Kentucky in which the crew took off from the wrong runway at night, resulting in a fatal accident. In the resulting civil law suits that followed, plaintiffs’ attorneys were successful in making public Comair’s accumulated voluntary safety reporting information. “It is vital to protect this information. The Comair case had a chilling effect on the data-reporting network,” he said. Without state protection, he explained, the ability to motivate crews to self report is heavily compromised, and each incidence erodes the system that much further.

Here at EBACE, one of Lausch’s missions is to educate and promote state protection of flight data monitoring information. FSF counsel Ken Quinn sits on the ICAO task force producing documentation on amending practices “to include stronger language on protecting safety data,” said Stein. The ultimate goal is to “send a strong message to nation states to implement protection of safety data into law,” he continued.