Method and system for evaluating flight route operation safety

Abstract

The invention discloses an airline operation safety assessment method and system. The method comprises the following steps: constructing a route operation safety detection element library and a detection key point library according to a route operation safety detection theme, and forming a route operation safety detection plan through structural design; performing route operation safety detection based on the route operation safety detection plan, and cleaning and classifying the collected route operation safety detection data; and designing an evaluation index, and associating the threat information and the error information with a plurality of preset features to form an evaluation index system so as to provide a decision basis for subsequent flight safety management. According to the method, the flight route operation safety detection plan is disassembled into the detection elements and the detection key points, the safety evaluation indexes are designed, and multiple core competency of the pilot is evaluated through the representative evaluation indexes, so that the effectiveness of flight route operation safety detection is ensured, and the utilization rate of flight route operation safety data is also improved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The invention relates to a method for evaluating the safety of flight line operation, and also to a system for evaluating the safety of flight line operation, belonging to the technical field of flight safety evaluation. Background Art

[0002] Line Operation Safety Assessment (LOSA) is a data-based safety management method. It involves professional and well-trained inspectors collecting safety data such as environmental conditions, operational complexity, and flight crew performance during scheduled flights. These data help airlines evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of flight operations and provide a comprehensive evaluation of the crew's technical and non-technical capabilities. Since route operations involve many elements and processes and face multiple threats and errors, which may be correlated, traditional safety assessment methods are difficult to effectively assess safety risks in terms of organizational management, crew cooperation, and procedural execution.

[0003] When conducting route operation safety assessments, airlines need to determine the focus of inspections based on their actual operations and collect safety data including airport risks, seasonal and environmental characteristics, personnel skill deficiencies, bad flying habits, organizational management, etc. The design of route operation safety inspection data and evaluation indicators requires professionals, and the threats and errors involved in the implementation process are complex and scattered. Direct inspection and traditional data statistical methods are inefficient and cannot guarantee quality and expected results.

[0004] In the process of implementing airline route operation safety, factors such as operability, consistency of inspector evaluation, data reliability, and data accuracy have a great impact on the effect. For example, the number of pilots of a medium-sized airline may exceed 1,000. When conducting a route operation safety assessment for the flight operation of a certain aircraft model, it may require about 10 inspectors to inspect at least 100 flight segments. To avoid repeated inspections of the same crew, each inspector inspects 2 flight segments per day. The short-term inspection cycle is 4 days, and the long-term inspection can last for 3 to 8 weeks. Throughout the process, managers, inspectors, data analysts, etc. need to have a consistent understanding and implementation of test data, test data standardization, and evaluation indicators, which is difficult to achieve with traditional direct inspection and data statistics methods. Summary of the invention

[0005] The primary technical problem to be solved by the present invention is to provide a method for evaluating the safety of route operation.

[0006] Another technical problem to be solved by the present invention is to provide a system for evaluating the safety of route operations.

[0007] In order to achieve the above object, the present invention adopts the following technical solutions:

[0008] According to a first aspect of an embodiment of the present invention, a method for evaluating flight line operation safety is provided, comprising the following steps:

[0009] Formulate a route operation safety inspection plan based on the inspection theme of route operation safety;

[0010] Carry out inspections according to the route operation safety inspection plan to obtain route operation safety inspection data;

[0011] Cleaning the route operation safety detection data to remove invalid data;

[0012] Obtain threat information and error information based on the cleaned route operation safety detection data;

[0013] Based on the threat information, calculating threat indicators corresponding to various types of threat information according to a first preset algorithm; and based on the error information, calculating error indicators corresponding to various types of error information according to a second preset algorithm;

[0014] Based on a plurality of preset features, each of the preset features is matched with each of the threat indicators or each of the error indicators to obtain a mapping relationship between each of the preset features and each of the threat indicators or each of the error indicators as an evaluation indicator of each of the preset features, thereby forming an evaluation indicator system;

[0015] Based on the evaluation index system, multiple core competencies of the pilot are evaluated to output the current level of each core competency of the pilot; wherein the current level of each core competency corresponds to a dimension of route operation safety evaluation index;

[0016] Based on the route operation safety assessment indicators in various dimensions, the route operation safety assessment results of the route operation safety detection subject are comprehensively output.

[0017] According to a second aspect of an embodiment of the present invention, there is provided a system for route operation safety assessment, comprising a processor and a memory; wherein the memory is coupled to the processor and is used to store a computer program, and when the computer program is executed by the processor, the processor implements the above-mentioned route operation safety assessment method.

[0018] Compared with the prior art, the present invention forms a structured route operation safety detection plan by constructing a route operation safety detection element library and a detection key point library, and effectively collects and cleans route operation safety detection data. This method analyzes threat information and error information, combines preset features, forms an evaluation index system, thereby evaluating the core competencies of pilots and outputting route operation safety evaluation results. This process not only improves the effectiveness and data utilization of route operation safety detection, but also provides a scientific decision-making basis for flight safety management by comprehensively evaluating the technical and non-technical competencies of pilots, helps to identify safety hazards, optimize flight operations, and improve flight safety levels. In addition, the present invention also provides data support for pilot training by quantifying the evaluation results, further enhancing the practicality and operability of flight safety evaluation. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0019] Figure 1 A flowchart of a method for evaluating route operation safety provided by a first embodiment of the present invention;

[0020] Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of a process for forming a route operation safety detection plan in the first embodiment of the present invention;

[0021] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of a process for cleaning and classifying route operation safety detection data in the first embodiment of the present invention;

[0022] Figure 4 A schematic diagram of a process for forming an evaluation index system in the first embodiment of the present invention;

[0023] Figure 5 A schematic diagram of a system structure for evaluating route operation safety provided by a second embodiment of the present invention;

[0024] Figure 6 A schematic diagram of the system structure of a route operation safety assessment provided in the third embodiment of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0025] The technical content of the present invention is described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and specific embodiments.

[0026] The technical concept of the embodiment of the present invention is to evaluate the route operation safety through a structured and systematic method. First, a route operation safety detection element library and a detection point library are constructed according to the route operation safety detection theme to form a detailed route operation safety detection plan. Then, the route operation safety detection is implemented, relevant data is collected, and it is cleaned and classified to ensure the validity of the data. Next, by associating the threat information and error information in the cleaned data with preset features (such as flight phases, airports, routes, and roles, etc.), an evaluation index system is designed to comprehensively evaluate the technical and non-technical core competencies of pilots. Finally, based on the evaluation index system, the current level of each core competency of the pilot is output, and the route operation safety evaluation results are comprehensively output to provide a decision-making basis for flight safety management, thereby improving the safety and efficiency of route operations.

[0027] First embodiment

[0028] like Figure 1 As shown, the first embodiment of the present invention provides a method for route operation safety assessment. The method includes at least the following three steps: first, construct a route operation safety detection plan; second, perform route operation safety detection according to the plan, and clean and classify the collected route operation safety detection data; finally, associate the cleaned and classified data results with multiple preset features (such as flight phase, airport, route and role, etc., and may also include other features), and construct a behavior evaluation index system to output the route operation safety assessment results corresponding to the route operation safety detection theme, and provide a decision-making basis for subsequent flight safety management.

[0029] The following is a detailed description of the specific implementation process of these steps:

[0030] S10: Based on the theme of route operation safety inspection, construct a route operation safety inspection element library and inspection key point library, and form a route operation safety inspection plan through structured design.

[0031] Specifically, Figure 2 As shown, it includes steps S1 to S3:

[0032] S1: Based on the route operation safety detection theme, design multiple route operation safety detection elements related to the route operation safety detection theme to build a route operation safety detection element library.

[0033] Specifically, it further includes sub-steps S11 to S17:

[0034] S11: Based on the flight detection requirements, design flight and crew information as the first detection element;

[0035] S12: Based on the flight inspection requirements, design the crew performance in each flight phase as the second inspection factor;

[0036] S13: Based on threat management needs, design threat management methods as the third detection factor;

[0037] S14: Based on the error management requirements, design the error management method as the fourth detection factor;

[0038] S15: Based on the UAS (Undesired aircraft state) management requirements, design UAS management methods as the fifth detection factor;

[0039] S16: Based on the technical capability assessment requirements of the unit, the technical description of the unit is designed as the sixth inspection element;

[0040] S17: A route operation safety detection element library is constructed based on the first detection element, the second detection element, the third detection element, the fourth detection element, the fifth detection element and the sixth detection element.

[0041] S2: Based on each route operation safety detection factor, design multiple detection points to build a route operation safety detection point library.

[0042] Specifically, it includes sub-steps S21 to S27:

[0043] S21: Based on the first detection element, design multiple first detection points.

[0044] Among them, multiple first inspection points include at least: take-off and landing airports, aircraft model, crew flight experience, years of service in the position, crew familiarity, and whether it is a management position.

[0045] S22: Based on the second detection element, design multiple second detection points.

[0046] Among them, multiple second inspection points include at least: whether the safety check before takeoff is in place, whether the pilot's operation is standard, and the crew's excellence or shortcomings in each flight phase.

[0047] Specifically, the crew's operating performance is described and recorded according to the flight phase through testing, and this performance is recorded as structured data. For example, whether specific threats or errors are managed, who manages them, and whether the management is effective. According to the key points of each flight phase, the detection elements are disassembled and refined. For example, the flight phase can be divided into: pre-flight preparation, cockpit preparation, push-out and taxi-out phase, take-off phase, climb phase, cruise phase, descent phase, near landing phase, taxi-in phase, shutdown phase, special situation response and disposal. For another example, the key points of cockpit preparation include: the timing of checklist execution, the degree of crew discipline when executing the checklist, the clarity of checklist reading, the clarity of checklist answers, and the degree of confirmation and implementation of checklist items.

[0048] S23: Based on the third detection element, design multiple third detection points.

[0049] Among them, the multiple third detection points at least include: classification of threats, detailed description of management of various types of threats, and description of whether consequences are caused.

[0050] By decomposing the entire threat management process, detection data is formed to provide data support for safety assessment indicators. For example, the threat management method of detection elements can be subdivided into multiple types of detection points, among which the threat management method related to air traffic controllers (ATC) is defined as the threat management brought by ATC, which can be further subdivided into several types of detection points, such as whether frequently changing ATC instructions are managed, how they are managed, and whether they lead to consequences; whether ATC instructions with many contents are managed, how they are managed, and whether they lead to consequences; whether late ATC instructions are managed, how they are managed, and whether they lead to consequences, etc.

[0051] The crew's performance in dealing with these threats is difficult to monitor and evaluate through safety management methods such as flight quality monitoring, four-dimensional trajectory monitoring, and safety inspections, but they can all be used as clear inspection points for inspection and data recording during route operation safety inspections. For each inspection point, the corresponding inspection data needs to be recorded, and the specific form of the inspection data needs to be determined based on the content of the inspection point. For example, as mentioned above, whether the frequently changing ATC instructions are managed, how they are managed, and whether they lead to consequences, corresponds to a series of inspection data records, including: The number of times N that ATC issues instructions during critical flight phases (including takeoff, approach, and landing) ATC , the minimum time interval between two ATC instructions in the critical phase ATC , whether to manage the threat ATC , who managed the threat (captain, co-pilot, crew together), a textual description of the management method, a classification of the consequences (no consequences, UAS, event, symptom, accident) parameters (for example, they can be assigned values ​​of 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 respectively), and a textual description of the consequences.

[0052] In addition, the threat management brought by ATC also includes threat management methods such as too much instruction content and late changes to instructions. The management of these threat categories are included in the detection point library, and the corresponding detection data are collected through route operation safety inspections.

[0053] S24: Based on the fourth detection element, design multiple fourth detection points.

[0054] Among them, the plurality of fourth detection key points include at least: classification of errors, detailed description of management of various types of errors, and description of whether consequences are caused.

[0055] Specifically, the errors that the crew may make are classified into structured categories. During each flight inspection, the inspector describes how each type of error is managed and whether it leads to consequences. The errors here may be made by the captain, the co-pilot, or the crew. The common errors of the captain, co-pilot, and crew provide data preparation for subsequent role characteristic-related evaluation indicators.

[0056] S25: Based on the fifth detection element, design multiple fifth detection points.

[0057] Among them, multiple fifth detection points include at least: classification of UAS, detailed description of the management of various types of UAS, and description of whether consequences are caused.

[0058] S26: Based on the sixth detection element, design multiple sixth detection points.

[0059] Among them, several sixth inspection points include at least: whether the operations in each flight phase meet the airline's standards, the record and assessment of the crew's resource management behavior capabilities, and suggestions for improving safety, training and flight.

[0060] S27: Constructing a route operation safety inspection point library together based on the plurality of first inspection points, the plurality of second inspection points, the plurality of third inspection points, the plurality of fourth inspection points, the plurality of fifth inspection points and the plurality of sixth inspection points.

[0061] S3: Carry out structured design based on the route operation safety inspection element library and the route operation safety inspection key point library to form a route operation safety inspection plan.

[0062] like Figure 2As shown, in one embodiment of the present invention, by disassembling the constituent elements of route operation safety detection elements and detection points, a standard detection element library and detection point library are established. The role of the detection element library is to specify the composition, classification and data format of the detection elements by establishing classification specifications for the detection elements. These detection elements are independently managed, independently expanded and independently used. The standard detection element specifications can enable the normalized and standardized use of the detection data corresponding to the detection elements when constructing evaluation indicator scenarios. By constructing a detection point library, the key points of the detection elements are refined and split, and the basic detection points are defined and standardized to build a complete detection plan.

[0063] S20: Implement route operation safety inspection based on the route operation safety inspection plan, and clean and classify the collected route operation safety inspection data.

[0064] Specifically, Figure 3 As shown, steps S4 to S6 are included:

[0065] S4: Implement route operation safety inspection based on the route operation safety inspection plan and collect route operation safety inspection data.

[0066] It can be understood that the embodiments of the present invention can reduce man-hours by 6 to 10 times through refined classification and structured data collection. Only 1 to 2 people are needed to complete the analysis and processing tasks of all the company's route operation safety detection data, and ensure that the data quality fully meets the needs of subsequent analysis and utilization.

[0067] For example, in the traditional route operation safety inspection method, according to an airline with 2,000 pilots, the inspector inspects 200 segments, and the analysis and processing of the inspection data requires 300 hours of man-hours, and the subsequent pilot flight ability analysis requires about 200 hours of man-hours. The two work links require about 3 people and 1 month to complete. However, using the data collection method of the embodiment of the present invention, it only takes 1 person 2 weeks to complete the route operation safety inspection data analysis and pilot flight ability analysis.

[0068] S5: Clean the route operation safety inspection data to remove invalid data.

[0069] In one embodiment of the present invention, the inspector first performs a self-check on the data, and other inspectors perform a cross-check to complete the data self-check process.

[0070] Then, the collected route operation safety detection data are cleaned and normalized by auxiliary analysts to clean the data that obviously lacks element descriptions and threat error characteristics.

[0071] Finally, auditors review the quality of route operation safety testing data.

[0072] Therefore, through the process of data self-inspection, data cleaning and data review, the validity of the cleaned route operation safety inspection data is guaranteed.

[0073] S6: Obtain threat information and error information based on the cleaned route operation safety detection data.

[0074] Specifically, after data cleaning is completed, the cleaned data needs to be classified according to the detection points to obtain which information contains threats (ie, threat information) and which information contains errors (ie, error information).

[0075] It is understandable that the threat information and error information in the embodiments of the present invention may come from multiple aspects, including but not limited to the following:

[0076] 1. Threat Information

[0077] (1) Bad weather: Weather phenomena such as strong winds, heavy rain, lightning, hail, and haze may pose a direct threat to flight safety. Specifically, this type of threat information requires the collection of weather data, such as wind speed, air humidity, visibility, and other data.

[0078] (2) Terrain factors: Complex terrain, such as mountains, canyons, lakes, etc., may affect the flight route and flight altitude, increasing the difficulty and risk of flight. Specifically, this type of threat information requires the collection of terrain data, such as the current flight altitude, mountain height, canyon width, etc.

[0079] (3) Air traffic: Congested air or ground traffic may lead to flight conflicts and dangerous close encounters. Specifically, this type of threat information requires the collection of data such as the flight routes of other aircraft, the number of aircraft in the vicinity, and the distances between adjacent aircraft.

[0080] (4) Aircraft failure: Failure of key components such as engines, navigation equipment, and communication equipment may affect flight performance and safety. Specifically, this type of threat information requires the collection of data on the aircraft itself, such as engine speed, power, and communication failure points.

[0081] (5) External objects: such as sky lanterns, drones, kites and other "low, slow and small" flying objects, as well as birds and other creatures, may pose a threat to flight safety. Specifically, this type of threat information needs to collect data such as the size of the external object, its flight speed, and the distance between it and the aircraft.

[0082] 2. Error Information

[0083] (1) Procedural Error: A deviation from regulations or flight procedures where the intention is correct but the execution is flawed, for example, setting the flaps to the wrong angle or forgetting to perform an important check step.

[0084] (2) Communication errors: miscommunication, misinterpretation, or failure to communicate relevant information between crew members or with external organizations. Specifically, this type of error information needs to collect the specific communication content.

[0085] (3) Proficiency Error: An error caused by deficiencies in knowledge or psychomotor (stick and rudder) skills. Specifically, this type of error information needs to collect specific execution steps. For example, if a pilot is unable to correctly perform the emergency procedure in an emergency, the specific execution process needs to be collected.

[0086] (4) Operational decision errors: errors that are not standardized in conditions or carrier procedures and are unnecessary and endanger safety. This usually involves crew members making wrong decisions in complex situations. Specifically, this type of error information needs to collect specific decision-making descriptions, which need to be provided by the decision-makers.

[0087] (5) Human error: such as damage to aircraft and its components, ground equipment, facilities, etc., resulting in economic losses or safety hazards. This may be caused by negligence, improper operation or violation of regulations. Specifically, this type of error information needs to collect a specific description of the error, which is provided by the person at fault.

[0088] S30: Design evaluation indicators, associate threat information and error information with multiple preset features to form an evaluation indicator system to provide a decision-making basis for subsequent security management.

[0089] Specifically, Figure 4 As shown, steps S7 to S9 are included:

[0090] S7: Associating the threat information and the error information with a plurality of preset features to obtain evaluation indicators of each preset feature and form an evaluation indicator system.

[0091] Specifically, in one embodiment of the present invention, the plurality of preset features at least include: flight phase features, airport features, route features and role features. The flight phase features, airport features and route features all correspond to threat information, so as to obtain flight phase threat indicators, airport threat indicators and route threat indicators based on the threat information; the role features correspond to error information, so as to obtain role error indicators based on the error information.

[0092] The following is a detailed description of how to obtain the evaluation indicators for each preset feature:

[0093] (1) Targeting flight phase characteristics

[0094] The flight phases are divided into: pre-flight preparation, cockpit preparation, push-out and taxi-out phase, take-off phase, climb phase, cruise phase, descent phase, near landing phase, taxi phase, shutdown phase, and special situation response and disposal. Based on the threat information, the threat severity index and threat management index of any flight phase are calculated to obtain the safety performance level of the flight phase based on the difference between the threat severity index and the threat management index. Therefore, the safety performance levels of each flight phase together constitute the flight phase threat index.

[0095] For example: for the takeoff phase, obtain the number of times ATC issues instructions N ATC and the minimum time interval between two ATC instructions ATC , the threat severity index St1 is calculated by weighted summation. ;in, , , are weight coefficients. The larger the value of the threat severity index St1, the greater the security risk caused by the threat;

[0096] Whether threats are managed during takeoff ATC and the classification parameter R that leads to the consequences ATC Weighted calculation of threat management level index Mt1, ;in, , , are weight coefficients. The larger the value of the threat management level Mt1, the better the threat management;

[0097] Calculate the safety performance level corresponding to the take-off phase , - Among them, safety performance indicators The larger the value, the smaller the security risk.

[0098] Moreover, it is understandable that the safety performance indicators corresponding to threats posed by other types of ATC, such as ATC instructions with more content and late changes to instructions, will be and , can be used with Together describe safety performance indicators related to the threat posed by ATC.

[0099] (2) Airport characteristics

[0100] The airport is divided into take-off airports and landing airports; based on the threat data, the number of threats at the take-off airport is obtained, and the average threat level of the take-off airport is calculated; based on the threat data, the number of threats at the landing airport is obtained, and the average threat level of the landing airport is calculated. Thus, the average threat level of the take-off airport and the average threat level of the landing airport together form the airport threat index.

[0101] (3) Route characteristics

[0102] Based on the threat data, the route threat rate, management threat rate and ineffective management threat rate are calculated for the threats involved in the route respectively to jointly form the route threat index.

[0103] Among them, route threat rate = total number of route threats ÷ total number of route flights; management threat rate = total number of managed threats ÷ total number of route flights; ineffective management threat rate = total number of ineffectively managed threats ÷ total number of route flights.

[0104] (4) Targeting role characteristics

[0105] Divide pilots into flying pilots and monitoring pilots;

[0106] Obtain respectively the errors caused by the captain as the flying pilot, the errors caused by the captain as the monitoring pilot, the errors caused by the co-pilot as the flying pilot, the errors caused by the co-pilot as the monitoring pilot, the errors caused by the crew together, the errors found by the captain as the flying pilot, the errors found by the captain as the monitoring pilot, the errors found by the co-pilot as the flying pilot, the errors found by the co-pilot as the monitoring pilot, and the errors found by the crew together;

[0107] Different weights are assigned based on different error types to calculate the error indicators corresponding to each type of error information.

[0108] For the same role, the error information directly caused by the role and the error information discovered by the role are obtained respectively. Then, the error index corresponding to the error information directly caused by the role is obtained as the first error index; and the error index corresponding to the error information discovered by the role is obtained as the second error index. Finally, the difference between the first error index and the second error index is used as the role error index corresponding to the role.

[0109] S8: Evaluate the pilot's multiple core competencies based on the evaluation index system to output the current level of each core competency of the pilot.

[0110] The above introduction to the "safety evaluation index" is only an exemplary description. It shows the core logic of "designing evaluation index" in the embodiment of the present invention, that is, by establishing data classification rules with the route operation safety detection database, designing evaluation indexes of main features, and thus constructing an evaluation index system that can reflect the pilot's flight ability level.

[0111] For example: the above-mentioned safety performance indicators, such as the emergence of a series of threats such as frequent changes in instructions from controllers, too late changes in instructions, and busy areas due to changes in weather conditions in recent stages, these performance indicators will involve multiple flight capability performances of the crew. Specifically, first, the crew begins to communicate regarding the threats discovered, which reflects the communication (COM) ability in the pilot's core competency. Whether there are errors in internal communication and external communication, combined with the crew's management of communication errors, can reflect the performance of the crew's communication ability; second, the process of jointly building situational awareness during communication is a reflection of the crew's individual situational awareness and information management (SAW) capability status; third, in the process of communication, individual situational awareness may still be improved or reduced in the process, and it will also show differences in knowledge application ability (KNO), resource coordination ability, and workload management (WLM) ability among individual crew members in the composition. differences; Fourth, the increase in the crew's basic workload causes insufficient available cognitive resources, resulting in omitted or inadequate briefings, and the implementation of briefings is the most concentrated embodiment of the crew's information management capability co-construction and problem solving and decision-making (PSD) process; Fifth, if the crew does not conduct sufficient communication and briefings after identifying the threat, it may directly cause state deviations of manual or automatic driving when encountering bad weather in the final approach phase, lack of shouting reminders, low-altitude decision hesitation / deviation, and inconsistent goals among crew members. The manifestation of the crew's internal interaction process is reflected through procedure application and compliance (PRO) / automatic path control (FPA) / manual path control (FPM).

[0112] In one embodiment of the present invention, the core competencies of pilots may include technical competencies and non-technical competencies. Among them, technical competencies include the application of flight knowledge, the application of procedures (correct operation of aircraft systems), and the ability to manage flight routes, etc.; non-technical competencies include communication skills, stress resistance, perception, decision-making ability, and leadership, etc. It can be understood that based on each detection point, the classification of threats, the specific management methods of threats, and the number of threats can be determined, so that the threat data is associated with technical competencies to evaluate the pilot's competence from a technical level. In addition, based on a detailed description of the management of various types of threats and a description of whether the consequences are caused, the threat data is associated with non-technical competencies to evaluate the pilot's competence from a cognitive level.

[0113] Based on this, through multi-faceted assessments at the technical and cognitive levels, a comprehensive judgment of the pilot's core competencies can be achieved.

[0114] In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the evaluation of each core competency of the pilot can be quantified by numerical values ​​(for example, percentage data), so as to output the evaluation results of each core competency of the pilot. Then, based on the evaluation results of each core competency, a comprehensive evaluation result corresponding to the pilot (also percentage data) is output as the current level of the pilot's comprehensive core competencies.

[0115] S9: Based on the current level of each core competency of the pilot, comprehensively output the route operation safety assessment results corresponding to the route operation safety inspection theme.

[0116] In one embodiment of the present invention, the current level of each core competency of the pilot can be used to determine whether the route operation is safe, whether there are potential safety hazards, and which aspects can be improved and optimized. In addition, combined with the threat information and error information obtained in the above step S6, the route operation safety assessment result corresponding to the route operation safety detection theme is comprehensively output.

[0117] Furthermore, it is understood that in one embodiment of the present invention, a correspondence between the current level of core competence and the result of the route operation safety assessment can be pre-established, for example: if the current level of core competence is below 60%, the corresponding route operation safety assessment result is high risk; if the current level of core competence is between 60% and 80%, the corresponding route operation safety assessment result is medium risk; if the current level of core competence is above 80%, the corresponding route operation safety assessment result is low risk. In addition, the risk level can be further refined for the three levels of high, medium and low risks, and can be adaptively adjusted according to needs.

[0118] Therefore, after obtaining the current level of each core competency of the pilot after integration (i.e., percentage data) based on step S8, the route operation safety assessment result corresponding to the route operation safety inspection theme can be directly output according to the above correspondence.

[0119] In addition, it is understandable that based on the results of the route operation safety assessment, it is possible to know which core competencies the pilots are lacking, thereby providing data support for the development of training course scenarios for subsequent pilot training.

[0120] Second embodiment

[0121] like Figure 5As shown, a system for evaluating route operation safety provided by the second embodiment of the present invention includes a plan building module 1, a detection module 2, a data cleaning module 3, an analysis module 4, an evaluation module 5 and an output module 6.

[0122] Specifically, the plan construction module 1 is configured as follows: based on the route operation safety inspection theme, design multiple route operation safety inspection elements related to the route operation safety inspection theme to construct a route operation safety inspection element library; based on each route operation safety inspection element, design multiple inspection key points to construct a route operation safety inspection key point library; perform structured design based on the route operation safety inspection element library and the route operation safety inspection key point library to form a route operation safety inspection plan.

[0123] The detection module 2 is connected to the plan building module 1, and is used to implement route operation safety detection according to the route operation safety detection plan and collect route operation safety detection data.

[0124] The data cleaning module 3 is connected to the detection module 2 and is used to clean the route operation safety detection data to remove invalid data.

[0125] The analysis module 4 is connected to the data cleaning module 3 and is used to obtain threat information and error information based on the cleaned route operation safety detection data.

[0126] The evaluation module 5 is connected to the analysis module 4 and is used to associate the threat information and the error information with a plurality of preset features to obtain evaluation indicators of each preset feature and form an evaluation indicator system.

[0127] The output module 6 is connected to the evaluation module 5, and is used to evaluate the multiple core competencies of the pilot based on the evaluation index system to output the current level of each core competency of the pilot; and based on the current level of each core competency of the pilot, comprehensively output the route operation safety evaluation result.

[0128] Third embodiment

[0129] Based on the above-mentioned route operation safety assessment method, the third embodiment of the present invention provides a route operation safety assessment system. Figure 6 As shown, the system includes one or more processors and a memory. The memory is coupled to the processor and is used to store one or more programs. When the one or more programs are executed by the one or more processors, the one or more processors implement the method for flight line operation safety assessment in the above embodiment.

[0130] The processor is used to control the overall operation of the system to complete all or part of the steps of the above-mentioned route operation safety assessment method. The processor can be a central processing unit (CPU), a graphics processing unit (GPU), a field programmable gate array (FPGA), an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC), a digital signal processing (DSP) chip, etc. The memory is used to store various types of data to support operations in the system, and these data may include, for example, instructions for any application or method operating on the system, and application-related data. The memory can be implemented by any type of volatile or non-volatile storage device or a combination thereof, such as static random access memory (SRAM), electrically erasable programmable read-only memory (EEPROM), erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM), programmable read-only memory (PROM), read-only memory (ROM), magnetic memory, flash memory, etc.

[0131] In an exemplary embodiment, the system can be implemented by a computer chip or entity, or by a product with a certain function, for executing the above-mentioned route operation safety assessment method and achieving the same technical effect as the above-mentioned method. A typical embodiment is a computer or a server. Specifically, the computer can be, for example, a personal computer, a laptop computer, a vehicle-mounted human-computer interaction device, a cellular phone, a camera phone, a smart phone, a personal digital assistant, a media player, a navigation device, an email device, a game console, a tablet computer, a wearable device, or a combination of any of these devices.

[0132] In another exemplary embodiment, the present invention further provides a computer-readable storage medium including program instructions, which, when executed by a processor, implements the steps of the method for route operation safety assessment in any of the above embodiments. For example, the computer-readable storage medium may be the above-mentioned memory including program instructions, and the above-mentioned program instructions may be executed by a processor of a system to complete the above-mentioned method for route operation safety assessment and achieve the same technical effect as the above-mentioned method.

[0133] In summary, the method and system for evaluating flight line operation safety provided by the embodiments of the present invention have the following beneficial effects:

[0134] (1) By subdividing the route operation safety inspection plan into inspection elements and inspection points, and establishing independent inspection element libraries and inspection point libraries, accurate correspondence and independent management of route operation safety inspection data are achieved. This method significantly improves the quality and availability of data through data cleaning and standardization. Furthermore, by designing safety assessment indicators and linking these indicators with the nine core competencies of pilots, the present invention not only ensures the effectiveness of route operation safety inspections, but also improves the utilization rate of route operation safety data.

[0135] (2) The present invention improves the efficiency of flight operation safety management by reducing the difficulty and workload of airlines in implementing route operation safety. Systematic safety data collection and analysis tools make safety decisions more scientific, thereby improving the level of safety management as a whole.

[0136] (3) The present invention also achieves cost-effectiveness optimization. Through systematic safety data collection and analysis, the utilization efficiency of safety data is improved, and safety risk management measures are concretized on the individual flight capabilities of pilots. This method not only reduces the implementation cost of airlines, but also improves the safety level during pilot training, bringing long-term safety and economic benefits to airlines.

[0137] It should be noted that the above embodiments are only examples, and the technical solutions of the various embodiments can be combined, all within the protection scope of the present invention.

[0138] In addition, the terms "first" and "second" are used for descriptive purposes only and should not be understood as indicating or implying relative importance or implicitly indicating the number of the indicated technical features. Therefore, the features defined as "first" and "second" may explicitly or implicitly include one or more of the features. In the description of the present invention, the meaning of "plurality" is two or more, unless otherwise clearly and specifically defined.

[0139] The above is a detailed description of the method and system for evaluating the safety of flight line operations provided by the present invention. For a person skilled in the art, any obvious changes made to the present invention without departing from the essence of the present invention will constitute an infringement of the patent right of the present invention and the person shall bear the corresponding legal liability.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating the safety of flight operations, characterized in that The steps include: Formulate a route operation safety inspection plan based on the inspection theme of route operation safety; Carry out inspections according to the route operation safety inspection plan to obtain route operation safety inspection data; Cleaning the route operation safety detection data to remove invalid data; Obtain threat information and error information based on the cleaned route operation safety detection data; Based on the threat information, calculating threat indicators corresponding to various types of threat information according to a first preset algorithm; and based on the error information, calculating error indicators corresponding to various types of error information according to a second preset algorithm; Based on a plurality of preset features, each of the preset features is matched with each of the threat indicators or each of the error indicators to obtain a mapping relationship between each of the preset features and each of the threat indicators or each of the error indicators as an evaluation indicator of each of the preset features, thereby forming an evaluation indicator system; Based on the evaluation index system, multiple core competencies of the pilot are evaluated to output the current level of each core competency of the pilot; wherein the current level of each core competency corresponds to a dimension of route operation safety evaluation index; Based on the route operation safety assessment indicators in various dimensions, the route operation safety assessment results of the route operation safety detection subject are comprehensively output.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that Based on the threat information, threat indicators corresponding to various types of threat information are calculated according to a first preset algorithm, specifically including: Based on the threat information, a threat severity index and a threat management level index of any flight phase are calculated to obtain a safety performance level of the flight phase based on a difference between the threat severity index and the threat management level index; wherein the safety performance levels of each flight phase together constitute a flight phase threat index; Based on the threat information, the number of threats at the departure airport is obtained, and the average threat level of the departure airport is calculated; and the number of threats at the landing airport is obtained, and the average threat level of the landing airport is calculated; wherein the average threat level of the departure airport and the average threat level of the landing airport together form an airport threat index; Based on the threat information, the route threat rate, management threat rate and invalid management threat rate are calculated for the threats involved in the route respectively, so as to jointly form a route threat index; wherein, the route threat rate = the total number of route threats ÷ the total number of route flights; the management threat rate = the total number of managed threats ÷ the total number of route flights; the invalid management threat rate = the total number of invalidly managed threats ÷ the total number of route flights.

3. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that: The flight phases include: pre-flight preparation, cockpit preparation, push-out and taxi-out phase, take-off phase, climb phase, cruise phase, descent phase, near landing phase, taxi-in phase, shutdown phase and special situation response and disposal; For the takeoff phase, obtain the number of times ATC issues instructions N ATC and the minimum time interval between two ATC instructions ATC , the threat severity index St1 is calculated by weighted summation. ;in, , , are weight coefficients. The larger the value of the threat severity index St1, the greater the security risk caused by the threat; Whether threats are managed during takeoff ATC and the classification parameter R that leads to the consequences ATC Weighted calculation of threat management level index Mt1, ;in, , , are weight coefficients. The larger the value of the threat management level Mt1, the better the threat management; Calculate the safety performance level corresponding to the take-off phase , - Among them, safety performance indicators The larger the value, the smaller the security risk.

4. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that Based on the error information, error indicators corresponding to various types of error information are calculated according to a second preset algorithm, specifically including: Obtaining error types of different pilots in different roles respectively; wherein the different roles include the captain and the co-pilot, and the different pilots include the operating pilot and the monitoring pilot; Obtain common error types of the crew; Different weights are assigned based on different error types to calculate the error indicators corresponding to each type of error information.

5. The method according to claim 4, characterized in that: The plurality of preset characteristics at least include: flight phase characteristics, airport characteristics, route characteristics and role characteristics; Among them, the flight phase characteristics, airport characteristics and route characteristics correspond to the flight phase threat indicators, airport threat indicators and route threat indicators respectively; the role characteristics correspond to the error indicators corresponding to various types of error information.

6. The method according to claim 5, characterized in that: For the same role, obtain the error information directly caused by the role and the error information discovered by the role respectively; Obtaining an error indicator corresponding to the error information directly caused by the role as a first error indicator; and obtaining an error indicator corresponding to the error information discovered by the role as a second error indicator; The difference between the first error indicator and the second error indicator is used as the role error indicator corresponding to the role.

7. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that According to the inspection theme of route operation safety, a route operation safety inspection plan is formed, including: According to the route operation safety observation theme, design a plurality of route operation safety observation elements related to the route operation safety observation theme to construct a route operation safety observation element library; Based on each of the route operation safety observation elements, multiple observation points are designed to construct a route operation safety observation point library; A structured design is performed based on the route operation safety observation element library and the route operation safety observation key point library to form a route operation safety observation plan.

8. The method according to claim 7, characterized in that: The plurality of route operation safety observation elements include at least: flight and crew information, crew performance at each flight phase, threat management methods, error management methods, UAS management methods, and technical description of the crew; The key points of observation corresponding to the flight and crew information include at least: take-off and landing airports, aircraft model, crew flight experience, years of service, crew familiarity, and whether they are in management positions; The key points for observing the crew performance at each flight phase include at least: whether the pre-takeoff safety check is in place, whether the pilot's operation is standard, and the crew's excellence or shortcomings in each flight phase; The observation points corresponding to the threat management method include at least: classification of threats, detailed description of the management of various types of threats, and description of whether the consequences are caused; The observation points corresponding to the error management method include at least: classification of errors, detailed description of the management of various types of errors, and description of whether the consequences are caused; The key points of observation corresponding to the UAS management method include at least: the classification of UAS, a detailed description of the management of each type of UAS, and a description of whether the consequences are caused; The key observation points corresponding to the technical description of the crew shall include at least: whether the operations in each flight phase meet the airline's standards, the record and assessment of the crew's resource management behavioral capabilities, and suggestions for improving safety, training and flight.

9. A system for evaluating the safety of flight operations, characterized in that include: A plan building module is used to form a route operation safety inspection plan based on the inspection theme of route operation safety; A data acquisition module, connected to the plan building module, for implementing detection according to the route operation safety detection plan to obtain route operation safety detection data; A data cleaning module, connected to the data acquisition module, for cleaning the route operation safety detection data to remove invalid data; An analysis module, connected to the data cleaning module, for obtaining threat information and error information based on the cleaned route operation safety detection data; Based on the threat information, calculating threat indicators corresponding to various types of threat information according to a first preset algorithm; and based on the error information, calculating error indicators corresponding to various types of error information according to a second preset algorithm; an evaluation module connected to the analysis module, and configured to match each of the preset features with each of the threat indicators or each of the error indicators based on a plurality of preset features, so as to obtain a mapping relationship between each of the preset features and each of the threat indicators or each of the error indicators as an evaluation indicator of each of the preset features, thereby forming an evaluation indicator system; and, based on the evaluation indicator system, evaluate a plurality of core competencies of the pilot, so as to output a current level of each of the core competencies of the pilot; wherein the current level of each core competency corresponds to a dimension of route operation safety evaluation indicators; The output module is connected to the evaluation module and is used to comprehensively output the route operation safety evaluation result of the route operation safety detection subject based on the route operation safety evaluation indicators of various dimensions.

10. A system for evaluating the safety of flight operations, characterized in that It comprises a processor and a memory; wherein the memory is coupled to the processor and is used to store a computer program, and when the computer program is executed by the processor, the processor implements the method for route operation safety assessment as described in any one of claims 1 to 8.

Images