FRAT Flight Risk Assessment Tool

[Jerry 5TJ]

A group of experienced instructors in the PA46 owner's group --MMOPA-- have created an iPhone application to assess risks of a particular flight. It is intended specifically for PA46 operations and based on the risk factors known to be germane based on accident history.

The tool is based on the FAA FRAT model but extended to include factors not in the FAA list.

Cross-country flights in Mooneys are similar enough in nature that the MMOPA FRAT tool is of use to us, too.  Of course almost all PA46 are FIKI and pressurized so the tool presumes de-ice and high altitude capabilities. 

Download from the Apple App Store; it is offered to the aviation community free of charge.  

Sample screen shots:

 

The pilot works through the app entering information about himself, the aircraft, weather at destination and alternate.  There are about 30 factors considered.  

 

 

As you go through the questionnaire the score is updated with each answer. 

 

[Andy95W]

Good App, Jerry.  Thanks for posting it.

[201er]

Although the FRAT model may be a reasonable way for a corporate or organizational culture to even out the risk taken by all participants to a group standard, I think it is a pretty silly thing to do on a personal level. If you need an app to tell you not to takeoff into windy, mountainous conditions, with low ceilings, at night, from a short runway when you are tired and not current, then you've got much bigger problems.

Edited July 2, 2017 by 201er

[Jim Peace]

is there a slide switch for touch and go at destination?

[carusoam]

+1 for usable apps generated by or for a specific category of pilots...

I would seriously like an app that calculates take-off and landing numbers for my M20R. Just deliver the book numbers by the push of a few buttons.

Include Don Kaye's data for target landing speeds...

 

I can measure these numbers with WAAS accuracy.

Comparing real world numbers to book value would be a cinch.  (Cinch = old guy language meaning 'easy')

Is there a way to build on the PA46 experience?

Can the PA46 group increase the strength of their app to include the performance calculations for their planes?

They have started and are going the right direction.  

We knew at least one person that had a cell phone but didn't have the T/O calculation done in a usable way.

We are so close to having usable data that we can actually employ without studying a day in advance... or memorizing and remembering tables, or collecting a decade of experience....

+1 @Jerry 5TJ for bringing this to our attention.

Best regards,

-a-

 

 

 

[Hank]

Most risk assessment tools that I've seen include penalties for our type of flying:  single pilot, single engine, IFR, uncontrolled field. And don't mention flying at night or over mountains! (God help those who live in mountainous areas, it's too dangerous for them to leave the ground!) (Heard that all the time the 7 years I flew my Mooney out of WV.)

I see this one penalizes those of us without CFI or ATP certs. Most (almost all) places that I go are non-towered, and many don't have weather (including my home field). So I should just keep the plane in the hangar except for those training flights I need to get my CFI and single engine ATP . . . Even the tool put out by AOPA is biased in this manner, so I pretty much ignore these things. I know my risk tolerance and my recent experience; I can tell a good forecast from a bad one. And I make my decision.

Right now, it's time for me to get some practice flights in and do some maneuver reviews. She's been down a while, and I've been feeling a lack of altitude.  

[Jerry 5TJ]

11 hours ago, 201er said:

 

26 minutes ago, Hank said:

Most risk assessment tools that I've seen include penalties for our type of flying:  single pilot, single engine, IFR, uncontrolled field.....

The FRAT model IS biased -- based on accident statistics for single pilot operations in  single engine aircraft much like ours.  

[Hank]

36 minutes ago, Jerry 5TJ said:

 

Yep, there are many many single engine planes being flown single pilot. Therefore, there are many accidents.

 

[KLRDMD]

Hmmm, as an FAASTeam member, I beta tested that app last year.

https://www.faasafety.gov/SPANS/noticeView.aspx?nid=6609

[Guest]

If it's use causes one to pause and think for a moment or two and saves a life it's not a bad idea.

Clarence

[Hank]

45 minutes ago, M20Doc said:

If it's use causes one to pause and think for a moment or two and saves a life it's not a bad idea.

Clarence

It's all in how the tool is set up. When I lived in WV, the ones I checked all ended up with every single flight being too risky unless I had a second pilot in the plane, then it was marginal. So I've been ignoring these things since then. Single pilot, single engine, IFR, in mountains was pretty much the limit of the earlier tools . . . But my primary CFI had no problem sending me off on solo XCs. So I decided the problem was the Risk Assessment tools. Let's not mention what the tools said about single engine, single pilot, VFR, night flight, in the mountains . . . 

[Jim Peace]

2 hours ago, Hank said:

But my primary CFI had no problem sending me off on solo XCs. 

What was his experience?

[Hank]

Just now, Jim Peace said:

What was his experience?

15 years. Students are required to solo, and to take solo XC. Should people who live in WV, and places I overflew like E. KY, E. TN and W. NC not be allowed to learn to fly? Or should I have been required to train out of state, and not to fly my plane from WV back to see family in NC and GA? My first solo trip was KHTW --> KAVL to see my parents for the weekend, in a no GPS 172 (the other one had a 430, but I didn't like how it flew).

[Jim Peace]

11 hours ago, Hank said:

15 years. 

Thats great.....I was just curious if he/she was a 300 hour boy/gal wonder........I used to be one of them.  It always amazed me how I could have a license to instruct and I did not know what I did not know.....

[Marauder]

Although the FRAT model may be a reasonable way for a corporate or organizational culture to even out the risk taken by all participants to a group standard, I think it is a pretty silly thing to do on a personal level. If you need an app to tell you not to takeoff into windy, mountainous conditions, with low ceilings, at night, from a short runway when you are tired and not current, then you've got much bigger problems.

I look at the FRAT model like I look at checklists. Can you fly a Mooney without a checklist? Sure. But any aid to help verify or confirm an an action or decision can be an aid IMHO.

Just like an automated version of IMSAFE.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[MB65E]

I downloaded it. We've had a paper copy laminated in work airplanes. It's Just another tool!!

If you have 30sec to look at something that could make you think differently why not! 

thanks,

-Matt

[201er]

1 hour ago, Marauder said:

I look at the FRAT model like I look at checklists. Can you fly a Mooney without a checklist? Sure. But any aid to help verify or confirm an an action or decision can be an aid IMHO.

Nope! The FRAT model has a programmed go/no-go response and is attempting to make the decision for you.

A safety checklist would be another thing and may not be a bad idea. A safety checklist could be the beginning of your normal checklist with questions such as:

Checked for TFRs

Checked WX at origin

Checked WX at destination

Night Flgiht

Etc

[MB65E]

Our company frat has a similar go-No-go decision, but internally if over X number, the chief pilot must be notified.

the numbers are based off a similar scale.

-Matt

[Marauder]

Nope! The FRAT model has a programmed go/no-go response and is attempting to make the decision for you.
A safety checklist would be another thing and may not be a bad idea. A safety checklist could be the beginning of your normal checklist with questions such as:
Checked for TFRs
Checked WX at origin
Checked WX at destination
Night Flgiht
Etc

Trust me, in 30 years of flying I've see enough stupid pilot tricks to know that perhaps if the decision was made for them the result would have been different.

I have no problem with tools that says "hey stupid don't do this" and allowing you to be stupid anyway.

We have seen accidents reported on this site which question the decision of the pilots involved. What's wrong with a decision tool to help you make a decision, regardless if it was stupid?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[201er]

Just now, Marauder said:

Trust me, in 30 years of flying I've see enough stupid pilot tricks to know that perhaps if the decision was made for them the result would have been different.

I have no problem with tools that says "hey stupid don't do this" and allowing you to be stupid anyway.

Ok, you kind of have a point there. But if someone is so stupid that they'd need a program to tell them, "hey stupid don't do this," do you really think they'd listen? Someone who's stupid is usually too stupid to realize they're stupid and probably too stupid to listen to the app either.

[carusoam]

Mike, you may be over baking this a tad...

Could be the variety of brains available in the pilot population....

1) Some brains crank through logic lists without any difficulty.

2) Some crank through memorized lists without any paper or electronic support.

3) Others may not know their brain's short comings.

Having a FRAT does pretty well at adding a scale to all the things that adding to the challenge.

Sure, when you fly in the dark, IMC, single pilot....  many of the results are going to be a 9 on a scale of 11.

Running the FRAT and getting a 10 should make you think a little longer about what you can change to improve your level of safety...

What would it take to tell a well educated, young pilot, to back taxi the extra 200' prior to attempting a T/O on a warm day, fully loaded?  

Or ar least make him think, a T/O distance calculation would be a really good idea before doing this...

Constructive ideas would be really good here.

Best regards,

-a-

[Marauder]

Ok, you kind of have a point there. But if someone is so stupid that they'd need a program to tell them, "hey stupid don't do this," do you really think they'd listen? Someone who's stupid is usually too stupid to realize they're stupid and probably too stupid to listen to the app either.

 

True, as Forrest Gump pointed out "Stupid is as Stupid does". Sometimes the most intelligent person in the world can do something stupid. But truly intelligent people are those who when made aware that their activity is stupid and then stop, are truly intelligent. Those that don't are the basis for Darwinism.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Mooneymite]

Part 121 operators and many 135 operators use "dual dispatch" for every flight.  It is a great system involving agreement between the dispatcher and the PIC that the flight can be conducted safely.  The statistics for 121/135 accidents are pretty dang good.  When I plan a flight in my Mooney, I often consider "what would dispatch say?"

Having a second person review the planning is a sound idea.  I'm not sure software can do the same thing.

[MB65E]

It's not just about the app telling you what to do. It's a way to change the culture,  stopping and thinking about what's going on when things build up on you. 

There are red flags in every accident report. However, one needs to stop and see the red flags before they become written in the report. Many never see the red flags.

A major issue is that humans are resistant to changing in any culture.  

-Matt

[MB65E]

Better yet! I've played around with the app on several flights I really thought about doing. All were right there at my personal limits. One of the flights I scrubbed on my own. The app was right there at 23-24 on both of the slected flights. 

Play with it on flights that have scared you and see where they come in at. 

-Matt