Upload
anthony-bishop
View
214
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 1
Job profile and training requirements of
European flight dispatchers
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 2
1 General
2 Survey results
3 IOSA Auditing
4 Consequences
Agenda
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 3
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
What?
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 4
Andreas Cordes, 41 years old
Ex Lufthansa Captain
Experience on B747-400, B737, A319/20/21
Licensed Flight Dispatcher (Germany)
IOSA Lead Auditor and Trainer
Who?
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 5
Evaluate the environment of FOO/FDs in Europe and
define a job profile
Analyze Operator specific differences
What kind of training is required in order to get the job
done?
Assess the market chances for such a training course
Goals
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 6
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
A word about licenses
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 7
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
Confidentialty
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 8
1 General
2 Survey results
3 IOSA Auditing
4 Consequences
Agenda
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 9
Questionnaire has been sent to 140 Operators
All sizes, all business models,
all 32 JAA member states
Feedback received from 42 Operators
24 countries covered
Unfortunately very little feedback from:
UK
Low-Cost Carriers
Participants
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 10
Survey covers the work of 972 Flight Dispatchers
Being responsible for 1807 aircraft
Staff ratio: 0,54 FOO/FD per aircraft
Ratio varies, depending on the type of operation
Staff numbers
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 11
The majority is unlicensed
Licensing 1
Not Licensed:
54,9%
National license:
35,7%
License issued by
another European
country:
3,8%
FAA license:
5,5%
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 12
Licensing 2
Staff licensing vs. fleet size(most significant values highlighted)
Survey average
10 A/C or less
11 to 25 A/C
26 to 50 A/C
> 50 A/C
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%
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 13
1/3 of all Operators require staff to be licensedThese 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”
Hiring 1
Only National and
FAA License
recognized: 21,4%
Only National and
other EU license
recogniezd:
0%
National,FAA and
EU licenses
recognized:
42,9%
Only National
license recognized:
35,7%
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 14
Most Operators require previous airline experience
Hiring 2
Applicants must have previous experience
64,3%
70,4%
67,9%
76,9%
57,1%
75,0%
77,8%
0,0% 10,0% 20,0% 30,0% 40,0% 50,0% 60,0% 70,0% 80,0% 90,0%
Average
Unlicensed environment
Long haul operator
Regional carrier
Network carrier
Small operator (<10 A/C)
Large operator (>50 A/C)
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 15
Most Operators have hiring difficulties
Hiring 3
Hiring difficulties
23,8%
22,2%
32,1%
7,7%
23,8%
37,5%
11,1%
33,3%
54,8%
51,9%
46,4%
76,9%
52,4%
37,5%
77,8%
33,3%
0,0% 10,0% 20,0% 30,0% 40,0% 50,0% 60,0% 70,0% 80,0% 90,0% 100,0%
Average
Unlicensed environment
Long haul operator
Regional carrier
Network carrier
Small operator (<10 A/C)
Large operator (>50 A/C)
Operators not requiring previousairline experience
Very difficult
Difficult
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 16
Average on-the-job training for new-entrants is 3 monthsUnlicensed staff does not receive more on-the-job training
No compensation of training deficiencies
Hiring 4
12,7
10,5
13,6
16,6
13,5
9,0
15,3
11,3
0,0 2,0 4,0 6,0 8,0 10,0 12,0 14,0 16,0 18,0
Average
Unlicensed environment
Long haul operator
Regional carrier
Network carrier
Small operator (<10 A/C)
Large operator (>50 A/C)
Operators not requiring previous airlineexperience
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 18
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
Tasks and duties
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 19
Type of operation determines level of pre-flight assistanceUnlicensed staff is almost equally involved
Tasks and duties: Preflight assistance
Activity index pre-flight
16,6
15,0
18,7
12,0
17,2
16,3
18,1
18,4
0,0 2,0 4,0 6,0 8,0 10,0 12,0 14,0 16,0 18,0 20,0
Average
Unlicensed environment
Long haul operator
Regional carrier
Network carrier
Executive operator
Small operator (<10 A/C)
Large operator (>50 A/C)
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 20
All groups of FOO/FDs are equally active in operational
control dutiesException: executive operators
Tasks and duties: Operational Control
Activity index operational control
4,8
4,6
4,9
5,1
5,0
3,6
4,6
5,4
0,0 1,0 2,0 3,0 4,0 5,0 6,0
Average
Unlicensed environment
Long haul operator
Regional carrier
Network carrier
Executive operator
Small operator (<10 A/C)
Large operator (>50 A/C)
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 21
Tasks and duties: In-flight assistance
In-flight assistanceNormal duties(most significant values highlighted)
Ave
rag
e
Un
licensed
enviro
nm
ent
Lo
ng
hau
lo
perato
r
Reg
ion
alcarrier
Netw
ork
carrier
Execu
tive o
perato
r
Sm
all op
erator
(<10 A
/C)
Larg
e op
erator
(>50 A
/C)
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% 60,0% 62,5% 100,0%
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 positionof each individual aircraft at any given time (flight-following)
56,1% 48,1% 63,0% 41,7% 65,0% 60,0% 62,5% 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%
Level of in-flight assistance varies by operator typeRemarkable: Many operators provide flight-followingSmall Operators provide less in-flight assistance
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 22
FOO/FDs that work for small operators are kept busy with
commercial activities (scheduling, bookings….)
Tasks and duties: Other activities
Activity index other activities
3,2
3,8
2,9
4,2
2,4
4,6
4,6
1,6
0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 3,0 3,5 4,0 4,5 5,0
Average
Unlicensed environment
Long haul operator
Regional carrier
Network carrier
Executive operator
Small operator (<10 A/C)
Large operator (>50 A/C)
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 23
1 General
2 Survey results
3 IOSA Auditing
4 Consequences
Agenda
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 24
European Operators have more findings in the Dispatch
section, especially
Initial training
and
recurrent training
IOSA Audits
IOSA Europe
IOSA world average
0,00% 2,00% 4,00% 6,00% 8,00% 10,00% 12,00% 14,00% 16,00%
IOSA Europe
IOSA world average
0,00% 5,00% 10,00% 15,00% 20,00% 25,00% 30,00%
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 25
Operational problems discovered in IOSA audits
IOSA Audits
Lack of a clear definition of the interface between operational controllers and pilots:
Pilots not being aware of the fact that the flight plan might have been processed by untrained individuals and might not have been checked for suitable aerodromes, route restrictions and performance limitations.
Lack of defined processes and procedures for duties and activities:
Duties not performed in a standardized manner and 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 26
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 !!
IOSA Audits
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 27
1 General
2 Survey results
3 IOSA Auditing
4 Consequences
Agenda
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 28
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
Consequences I
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 29
Operators believe that a 3 mth. training would be adequate
Consequences II
Proposed duration of training course in weeks
12,2
10,0
12,8
12,3
15,3
5,8
17,3
13,7
0,0 2,0 4,0 6,0 8,0 10,0 12,0 14,0 16,0 18,0 20,0
Average
Unlicensed environment
Long haul operator
Regional carrier
Network carrier
Small operator (<10 A/C)
Large operator (>50 A/C)
Operators not requiring previous airlineexperience
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 30
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
Consequences III
28 OCT 2006© Andreas Cordes
Slide 31
Thank you!
In case of questions, please contact:
… for your attention
and
… for your support !