Saturday, May 16, 2015

7.7 - Research: Operational Risk Management

My Operational Risk Management (ORM) Assessment Tool is for the US Army’s Scan Eagle, Unmanned Aerial System (UAS).  It is a single engine, single wing aircraft that is significantly smaller as compared to the USAF’s RQ-1, RQ-9, and RQ-4 at just less than 5.6 feet long with a wingspan of 10.2 feet ("INSITU: ScanEagle system," 2013).  It weighs in at maximum of 48.5 pounds, cruises at 50 to 60 knots that is capable of endurance greater than 24 hours while operating at altitudes up to 19,500 feet ("INSITU: ScanEagle system," 2013).  What’s unique about this system is its launch and recover systems in which it utilizes a catapult for launch and a sky hook for recovery/capture.  Finally the Scan Eagle is capable of using multiple advanced sensors and can be controlled both by line-of-sight (LOS) and beyond-line-of-sight (BLOS) methods ("INSITU: ScanEagle system," 2013)

As for the Risk Assessment Tool (RAT) that I created can be seen below.  It’s basic design was based on what was displayed in our reading.  This form is designed to be accomplished by all crew members involved in the sortie as team prior to flight and be reviewed by the supervisor of flying (SOF).  Starting from the top, each crew member and their assigned position will be filled out.  Next the mission or aircraft commander will go down each row, reading it out loud to the crew to answer and input the corresponding number that’s applicable in the far right column.  Once all rows are complete, the inputted numbers are totaled and then compared to the Risk Level chart at the bottom to determine which category the crew falls into.  Based on their risk level assessment, the corresponding authorization is required in order to continue with the sortie.

This form will improve operations and reduce potential risk by highlighting to the flying crew members and the appropriate authorization level individual to their overall risk level of the sortie in order to determine what if any significant issues are present.  Second at a minimum it will invoke a discussion on any applicable areas and what mitigation techniques can be used to minimize or removed the risk.  Third it will help to determine if the planned sortie shall continue based on the overall risk level.  This last step however can vary depending on the priority of the sortie and the risk in which the crew and the commanders are willing to except. 

As for the issues being questioned on the RAT, both the Preliminary Hazard List/Analysis (PHL/A) and the Operational Hazard Review & Analysis (OHR&A) tools were used and can be seen below.  Although both are not all-in-conclusive in that they only mention some of the issues in which I was able to identify based on the limited knowledge I had on the Scan Eagle system.  In addition, both the PHL/A and the OHR&A only cover the Operational Stage hazards.  Like the Risk Assessment Tool, both of these forms were also based on the reading assignment this week.  Additionally the Probability, Severity, Risk Level and Residual Risk Level were based on the Department of Defense MIL-std-882D/E documentation.  All forms were reproduced and tailored for this assignment.

Reference:

Barnhart, R., Shappee, E., & Marshall, D. (2011).Introduction to unmanned aircraft systems: Chapter 8 - safety assessment. (pp. 123-135). London, GBR: CRC Press, 2011. DOI: ProQuest ebrary, Web 5 May 2015

Department of Defense, Systems Engineering. (2012).DoD standard practice system safety (MIL-STD-882E). Retrieved from Department of Defense website: https://acc.dau.mil/adl/en-US/683694/file/75173/MIL-STD-882E Final 2012-05-11.pdf

INSITU: ScanEagle system. (2013). Retrieved from http://www.insitu.com/systems/scaneagle
Wilke, C. (2007, March 2). Boeing: ScanEagle system overview. Retrieved from http://www.csdy.umn.edu/acgsc/Meeting_99/SubcommitteeE/SEpubrlsSAE.PDF


("DoD standard practice," 2012)

("DoD standard practice," 2012)
("DoD standard practice," 2012)





No comments:

Post a Comment