C-foqa

[sleepy]

I am writing the C-FOQA section of our FOM. I have looked around the internet but have not been able to find any examples to review for ideas. If anyone here has a C-FOQA program and would not mind letting me read your verbage, I will really appreciate it.

I am not looking to steal your program, they are all a little different based on the type of operation and aircraft used. I am just looking for a basic outline to start from by someone who is already doing this.

 

[G4G5]

Find someone who has done the mod or who has recently taken delivery of a new aircraft with FOQA.

Or call the mfr and tell them that you are going to do the mod and want the verbiage.

 

[sleepy]

Find someone who has done the mod or who has recently taken delivery of a new aircraft with FOQA.

Or call the mfr and tell them that you are going to do the mod and want the verbiage.

Flight Operations Quality Assurance(FOQA) is the program. The Quick Access Recorder (QAR) is the equipment required to participate in FOQA. We already have the QAR and it works great. FOQA is a safety program where you take your de-identified QAR data and send it to a vendor who analizes the data and reports deviations from the standard or other "events" such as a gear or flap overspeed back to you. This allows you to identify trends in your fleet and also to compair your trends to others in the industry. Flight Safety Foundation has a program run by Austin Digital. We are not in that program, but I was hoping someone who participates in one could share some information.

 

[G4G5]

I know of 2 operators who have installed FOQA, during maintenance checks and one that had factory installed for delivery with a new aircraft (all Gulfstreams) .

I spoke with one of them a while back and they were able to get all of the information from the mfr prior to the installation. If you had an external vendor supply your manuals they may also provide you with the information (as opposed to doing it all in house). One of the folks I know just called their manual folks and told them that they needed to add a FOQA section to their ops manual and the vendor had already written a something for another customer.


Hopefully someone here can help (because I am in the same boat, we are getting it installed in April)

 

[sleepy]

I know of 2 operators who have installed FOQA, during maintenance checks and one that had factory installed for delivery with a new aircraft (all Gulfstreams) .

I spoke with one of them a while back and they were able to get all of the information from the mfr prior to the installation. If you had an external vendor supply your manuals they may also provide you with the information (as opposed to doing it all in house). One of the folks I know just called their manual folks and told them that they needed to add a FOQA section to their ops manual and the vendor had already written a something for another customer.


Hopefully someone here can help (because I am in the same boat, we are getting it installed in April)

We have a manual vendor, but those people expect to be paid for work. This is the problem for me, we are going to do it in-house. We are the first corporate customer to sign up with the FOQA vendor, so they don't realyl have a "program" yet. It is an interesting situation.

 

[AOBLrJet]

Sorry haven't been on in a while. We have C-FOQA installed on our aircraft aftermarket. Actually one of the first coprorate operators to have this few years ago. Our information is run through Austin Digital and FSF is what I understand. If you are still looking for information PM me and I will put you in touch with our guy that runs the program for our department.

 

[AA717driver]

Do the insurers or ISBAO people want this or is it just a "me too" with the airlines/manufacturers?

I can see having FOQA on a large fleet like fracs or even a large corporate department where you swap crews and aircraft frequently but on a one or two airplane department...?

Maybe I'm missing something.

TC

 

[ClubORD]

Do the insurers or ISBAO people want this or is it just a "me too" with the airlines/manufacturers?

I can see having FOQA on a large fleet like fracs or even a large corporate department where you swap crews and aircraft frequently but on a one or two airplane department...?

Maybe I'm missing something.

TC

As an aviation insurance agent I can tell you that a FOQA program or more importantly a commitment from a flight operator to implement a FOQA program is a huge plus from a risk management standpoint.
Most likely, a "FOQA-friendly" operator has an established SMS program which with the proper documentation and structure can lead to a significant annual premium reduction over time. Although we as pilots may feel that for a two pilot operation a FOQA program is silly; underwriting and insurers eat this up and like to see this commitment to safety and standardization.

Case in point, I was recently looking at FOQA stats for one of my operators (a single Challenger 604 with 2 pilots) and you can tell the empty legs from the data. The rotation rates and G-loading figures were significantly higher than when the boss was on board!

 

[Gulfstream 200]

Case in point, I was recently looking at FOQA stats for one of my operators (a single Challenger 604 with 2 pilots) and you can tell the empty legs from the data. The rotation rates and G-loading figures were significantly higher than when the boss was on board!

So? - what does that tell you?

and why does the insurance agent have access to the FOQA data and talk about it on the internet? How many 2 pilot single challenger 604's have FOQA installed? Bet that wont take long to figure out. So much for confidentiality.

People may fly slightly different when nobody is onboard....not worry about braking as dead smooth, rotating at more normal rates instead of the very (overly?) slow smooth rotation, hand-fly a little more for practice, etc.

Is it all safely within SOPs?

FOQA data - its only as useful as the monkey "analyzing" it, or passing judgement on it.

 

[G4G5]

Do the insurers or ISBAO people want this or is it just a "me too" with the airlines/manufacturers?

I can see having FOQA on a large fleet like fracs or even a large corporate department where you swap crews and aircraft frequently but on a one or two airplane department...?

Maybe I'm missing something.

TC

Hey TC,

The French are the ones driving the bus on this one, I recently had a buddy of mine install FOQA on his G4 because he could not fly any 135 trips into Paris without it. From what I understand No FOQA (on 121 or 135) no access to France. My buddies fear was that Germany and a couple of others would start mandating it as well, in essence killing his European charter business.

As far as ISBAO is concerned FOQA is still a recommendation (and it will be that way for a while). I help a buddy out doing ISBAO audits and from what I have seen a lot of folks are considering it but most are still waiting for the costs to come down. For large cabin aircaft depending upon the age you are looking at around $40-50K to get the ball rolling and then it's just like a cell phone plan, the fees for monitoring the data and preparing the reports add up quickly.

A lot of folks are also saying, no thanks. We don't care if we ever fly to France again and unless the FAA or the CAA mandate it we don't plan on installing it.

Another operator that I know had it installed as part of the purchase of new aircraft, with the idea being that they could turn it on when they want to, or if it became a requirement, the problem was their HR guy caught wind of it and had them turn it on ASAP.

As far as a cost reduction, the answer is yes to both. We received a break on the insurance for ISBAO approval and have been told that with FOQA we get get one as well. The issue is cost, FOQA is not cheap and the insurance discount will not cover what we spend to install it.

So, then it's up to management. I don't see how it will not be used against us by the company or management for who knows what reason. Our mgt people want it installed so we plan on installing it but not sure about turning it on. The reality is that someone will turn it on and so be it, we all operate within the SOPs so I look at it just like the CVR.

Only time will tell but, but IMHO it's only a matter of when not if. As aircraft become more advanced and more data points are easily accessible and already in place, a second monitoring computer is just going to be part of the evolutionary process. Hopefully, I will be retired by then.

I thought it was pretty wild what AA pulled the other day with the FDR on the 757 in Jackson Hole. Was that a FOQA aircraft?

P

 

[AOBLrJet]

In the beginning as a flight department we generally felt like we were being "big brothered." The person analyzing the data and presenting it to the group kept is very ambiguous and pointed out areas in need of improvement. If there was an "event" that he felt would be better off described by the pilot involved he would get their permission first.

Depending on how professionally the program is run in your department makes a huge difference. Whether or not an insurance company gets to look at the data is based on management decision I believe.

If you feel like it is going to ruin your empty leg flying technique then maybe your department really needs it.

 

[Gulfstream 200]

=AOBLrJet;2101361
If you feel like it is going to ruin your empty leg flying technique then maybe your department really needs it.

Or if you think the people flying your plane may need to be watched on empty legs you have already lost the battle - long before you spent the money on FOQA.

Very large department and looking for trends in SOPs among 30 different pilots? maybe?...but a single airplane operation? IMO just another item to throw money at to appease someone but do nothing for safety.

 

[ClubORD]

So? - what does that tell you?

and why does the insurance agent have access to the FOQA data and talk about it on the internet? How many 2 pilot single challenger 604's have FOQA installed? Bet that wont take long to figure out. So much for confidentiality.

People may fly slightly different when nobody is onboard....not worry about braking as dead smooth, rotating at more normal rates instead of the very (overly?) slow smooth rotation, hand-fly a little more for practice, etc.

Is it all safely within SOPs?

FOQA data - its only as useful as the monkey "analyzing" it, or passing judgement on it.

The insurance agent is looking at FOQA data because this is an element of the SMS Program the operator is implimenting and is a great resource to spot trends and help in the threat/error management within an operation.

Not saying it doesn't happen but I have never seen anyone spend the cash to install this just for discipline. If FOQA data is being used as "big brother" or used solely for busting someone, that it is a complete waste of time and completely counterproductive.

 

[AA717driver]

G4G5--Someone questioned whether this was even an incident that the NTSB should be involved in. I don't know. Whoever is running AA mx is seriously f'ed up. But as has been discussed, JAC is an accident waiting to happen. All AA airplanes are FOQA except for the -80's.

ClubORD--Thanks for the explanation. I think it's about time for Europe to get another beatdown. They're getting a little uppity. But it does make sense, now.

However, nothing against your industry, I just see this as another metric the industry uses to "mandate" better flying when the true cause is HR-driven hiring, dramatically reduced training requirements and touchy-feeley line checking.

[soapbox]Quite frankly, there are a lot of people in cockpits out there who can't find their a$$ with both hands and there's no mechanism (other than natural selection--not an optimum solution...) to get rid of them. [/soapbox]

TC

 

[ASA_Aviator]

Flight Operations Quality Assurance(FOQA) is the program. The Quick Access Recorder (QAR) is the equipment required to participate in FOQA. We already have the QAR and it works great. FOQA is a safety program where you take your de-identified QAR data and send it to a vendor who analizes the data and reports deviations from the standard or other "events" such as a gear or flap overspeed back to you. This allows you to identify trends in your fleet and also to compair your trends to others in the industry. Flight Safety Foundation has a program run by Austin Digital. We are not in that program, but I was hoping someone who participates in one could share some information.

You do not need a QAR to have FOQA. You can download directly from the FDR. Our airline has FOQA on 160+ aircraft, and no QARs.

 

[sleepy]

You do not need a QAR to have FOQA. You can download directly from the FDR. Our airline has FOQA on 160+ aircraft, and no QARs.

True, but it is easy to do with a QAR. But at $40K to install a QAR in a Falcon I can see why your airline would not want to spend that kind of money on a large fleet if it isn't necessary.