Risk Management Handbook (FAA-H-8083-2A)
• Approach Aids and Lighting–A facility without working approach aids and lighting for a given set of operating
conditions is a “V” hazard.
Airspace, Air Traffic Control, and Other Aircraft
Airspace requirements and ATC services facilitate safe and efficient operations. However, under some circumstances, their
presence or absence constitutes a “V” hazard.
• Prohibited and Restricted Airspace–Different airspace designations and restrictions are meant to protect pilots and
aircraft from hazards. For example, entering a prohibited or restricted area without permission can result in conflicts
with military aircraft.
• ATC Delays and Service Availability–The ATC system may require route changes or holding, which may require
more fuel than expected.
• Air Traffic Density and Collision Hazards–Pilots are responsible for seeing and avoiding other aircraft when flying
under VFR or in VMC while flying under IFR. However, under certain conditions, it is difficult to see other aircraft
because of haze, sunlight, aircraft position, blind spots, and other factors.
Night Operations
Night operations make it more difficult to see and identify other hazards.
• VFR operations–Visual operations are often hampered by visibility restrictions at night. This restricts a pilot’s ability
to see and avoid terrain and obstacles, other aircraft, precipitation, and other hazards.
• Single-engine operations–A forced landing at night may require a pilot to deal with unexpected terrain hazards. In
addition, the failure of engine accessories, such as an alternator, may lead to total electrical failure.
External Pressure Hazards
External pressures or “E” hazards originate from a variety of personal and business reasons. The pressure to get to a particular
destination or to leave at the conclusion of a planned stay can affect a pilot’s judgment. Pilots subject to external pressures
sometimes fail to consider the other three major categories of hazards.
• Why does the pilot need to fly to a particular destination at a given time? Wanting to be present at a family
celebration, wishing to see a terminally ill relative, or the need to be at an important meeting can affect pilot
motivation. It may be a simple matter of not wanting to disappoint someone waiting at the destination. It could also
include a condition that arises during a flight, such as a sick passenger.
• If a general aviation aircraft is used for business travel, a pilot may experience time pressure after committing to
be somewhere at a given time. Business flights place additional pressure on the pilot to conduct the “mission,”
regardless of the hazards and conditions.
Hazard Combinations
Pilots often need to consider the effect of interactions with several hazards at the same time.
Imagine that a pilot operates from the Elkins-Randolph County airport in Elkins, West Virginia (KEKN). This airport sits in a
valley at an elevation of 1,987 feet. The terrain and obstacles on the east and west sides rise to as high as 3,631 feet. The images
in Figure 3-4 and Figure 3-5 show a photograph and a sectional aeronautical chart excerpt of the Elkins airport.
Risk Management Handbook (FAA-H-8083-2A)
Figure 3-4. Elkins, WV airport.
Figure 3-5. Sectional chart excerpt of Elkins, WV airport.
The mountains and obstructions on both sides of the Elkins airport are a hazard. However, on a day with good visibility, few
clouds, and light winds, the associated risks are low for most aircraft engaged in visual flight rules (VFR) operations.
If the Elkins airport scenario changes to a night operation, the level of risk associated with the combination of hazards increases,
and an accident becomes more likely. Pilots exposed to these multiple hazards need to consider the equipment, skill, and
experience necessary to operate safely.
Hazards and Associated Risks
While interaction with a hazard can cause an accident, the level of risk associated with the hazard depends on composite of the
likelihood for the type of accident and the expected severity of injury as a result of such an accident. Depending on a particular
flight mission, each individual risk may be acceptable or unacceptable. In general aviation operations, the tolerance for risk is
Risk Management Handbook (FAA-H-8083-2A)
generally low, and pilots should use risk assessment and management tools to mitigate any unacceptable risk before embarking
on a flight.
Using a Flight Risk Assessment Tool (FRAT)
Identifying hazards and associating them with risks can be accomplished using a simple spreadsheet or form during flight
planning. The form used to record each hazard is known as a Flight Risk Assessment Tool (FRAT).
Numerical FRATs
A numerical FRAT lists different hazards and an associated number, which indicates the significance of each hazard. The pilot
selects the relevant hazards, and derives a total score. Typically, the score falls into three ranges. If the total score is below a
certain minimum, the FRAT indicates low risk. If it is in an intermediate range, the pilot is advised to “exercise caution.” If the
score is above an upper threshold, the FRAT indicates danger. [Figure 3-6]
RISK ASSESSMENT
Column total
Column total
SLEEP
1. Did not sleep well or less than 8 hours
2. Slept well
HOW DO YOU FEEL?
1. Have a cold or ill
2. Feel great
3. Feel a bit off
WEATHER AT TERMINATION
1. Greater than 5 miles visibility and 3,000 feet
ceilings
2. At least 3 miles visibility and 1,000 feet ceilings,
but less than 3,000 feet ceilings and 5 miles
visibility
3. IMC conditions
HOW IS THE DAY GOING?
1. Seems like one thing after another (late,
making errors, out of step)
2. Great day
IS THE FLIGHT
1. Day?
2. Night?
PLANNING
1. Rush to get off ground
2. No hurry
3. Used charts and computer to assist
4. Used computer program for all planning Yes
No
5. Did you verify weight and balance? Yes
No
6. Did you evaluate performance? Yes
No
7. Do you brief your passengers on the Yes
ground and in flight? No
Pilot’s Name Flight From To
TOTAL SCORE
0 10 20 30Not complex flight Exercise caution Area of concern
Endangerment
Low risk
Figure 3-6. Example of a numerical FRAT.
25487/11871
The FAA provides a numerical FRAT here. While this type of FRAT is easy to use, it has several drawbacks, including:
Risk Management Handbook (FAA-H-8083-2A)
1. The form may not cover all the hazards for a particular flight.
2. The range of scores for each risk level may appear arbitrary, leading a pilot to question the results.
3. The form does not encourage the pilot to analyze each hazard. For example, what is the likelihood the condition will
lead to an accident and what is the potential accident severity?
4. The form may indicate an overall low level of risk, leading the pilot to ignore the implications of a particular hazard.
Narrative FRATs
This type of FRAT asks the user to identify hazards and associate each hazard with risk. While taking more time to complete,
it addresses many of the disadvantages of a numerical FRAT. After identifying the hazards, the process includes a thorough
analysis and management of each risk.
The following example of a narrative FRAT has the pilot determine the likelihood and severity for each hazard identified using
the PA VE checklist [Figure 3-6]. After further analysis, the pilot can determine how to manage each risk. This concept will be
explored further in the next chapter.
Flight Risk Assessment Tool
PAVE Area Hazard Risk Likelihood Severity Composite Risk Mitigation Results
Pilot “P”
Aircraft “A”
Environment “V”
External Pressure “E”
Capability
Aeromedical
Fuel/Range/Payload
Equipment
Performance
Personal
Business
Weather
Terrain
Airspace, ATC, Airports
Night/Over Water
Figure 3-7. Example Flight Risk Assessment Tool.
Case Study
One way to understand the risk management process is to put it in a real-world context using a case study. The following
example will be used in this chapter, as well as Chapters 4 and 5, to illustrate a process to identify hazards, assess the associated
risks, and mitigate the risks as needed.
Background and Setting
It is early on Friday, July 1, and Tricia just finished a successful week of consulting for clients in Portland, Boise, Dallas,
and Albuquerque. She flew to these locations from her home base in Santa Rosa, California (KSTS) using her single-engine
airplane. She had planned to return directly to Santa Rosa, but yesterday evening, her friends from Santa Rosa, Matt and Martha
Smith, invited her to spend the weekend in Durango, Colorado where they have a condominium. She gladly accepted their
invitation because she would enjoy seeing them.
The flight from Albuquerque to Durango during the day on Friday goes smoothly. Tricia lands at the Animas Air Park (00C),
rather than the Durango-La Plata County Airport (KDRO) because the Smith’s condo is less than a mile from Animas Air Park,
toward town. Figure 3-8 shows a sectional chart excerpt from the Durango area.
Risk Management Handbook (FAA-H-8083-2A)
Figure 3-8. Aeronautical chart excerpt showing Durango, CO.
Tricia and the Smiths are enjoying the warm-weather weekend with rafting, cycling, and hiking as featured activities. The
Smiths are well-established in the Durango social scene, and the three friends go to parties on Friday and Saturday night,
with another one scheduled for Sunday night. Finally, on Monday, July 4, there will be a city-sponsored Independence Day
celebration where the Smiths will officiate.
It is now late afternoon on Sunday. Tricia and the Smiths are back in their condo relaxing and discussing the weekend.
Coincidentally, both Tricia and Martha Smith just received urgent emails from their separate home offices in Santa Rosa, CA,
alerting them to critical meetings that are scheduled for Tuesday afternoon–Tricia’s at 4 pm and Martha’s at 3 pm. Matt tries to
book airline tickets from Durango to Santa Rosa for Tuesday morning, and with a worried look, he announces that there are no
airline seats available until Wednesday, at the earliest.
Martha Smith then asks Tricia, “Would you be willing to fly us home in your airplane on Tuesday morning? This would allow
us all to enjoy the Monday celebration and the party Monday night before taking off early on Tuesday.” Tricia replies, “I need
to review the weather and do some other planning first, and we can all meet in a couple of hours.”
Tricia goes back to her room and begins her analysis. First, she looks at the route that she might take home. Originally, she
planned a direct VFR flight back to Santa Rosa, a nonstop flight of 711 nautical miles, as depicted in the sectional chart excerpt
in Figure 3-9.
Risk Management Handbook (FAA-H-8083-2A)
Figure 3-9. The direct route from Durango to Santa Rosa.
Tricia makes a quick analysis and figures she can fly this trip nonstop in just under five hours, with 6 hours and 45 minutes of
endurance with full tanks. She then evaluates the weather and immediately foresees some challenges.
A low-pressure system with a trailing cold front is moving south into northwest Colorado. The front is triggering severe
convective activity as it collides with moist air in the southwest. Low ceilings and poor visibility are widespread behind the
front, with mountain obscuration and icing in clouds above 8,000 feet. The weather in Durango should remain good VFR on
Monday, but change to IMC early Tuesday morning as the weather system slowly moves southeast.
Data
Tricia needs to organize, consider, and evaluate all the information.
Pilot and Passengers
The pilot and passenger data is as follows:
• Current under 14 CFR part 61 for VFR and IFR
• Last instrument time logged four months ago
• Tricia's weight is 130 pounds, the Smiths weigh 340 pounds together
• Tricia has 40 pounds of baggage, the Smiths have 80 pounds
Aircraft
The aircraft data is as follows:
• Not certificated for flight in known icing conditions
• Empty weight: 1903 pounds, Maximum gross weight 2,740 pounds
• Luggage compartment carries 120 pounds
• Current fuel 25 gallons (150 pounds) Fuel capacity 64 gallons (384 pounds)
• Average fuel consumption at 10,000 feet: 8.6 gallons per hour
Risk Management Handbook (FAA-H-8083-2A)
• Average true airspeed at 10,000 feet: 152 knots
• Calculated takeoff distance at 25º C, 6,700 feet pressure altitude, no wind, and 2,740 pounds: 4,700 feet over a 50-
foot obstacle
• Calculated takeoff distance at 25º C, 6,700 feet pressure altitude, no wind, and 2,500 pounds: 3,600 feet over a 50-
foot obstacle
Environment
The following is in addition to weather data mentioned earlier:
• Temperatures at Animas Air Park (00C): 25º C mornings, 35º C afternoons, calm winds
• California weather forecast: Good VFR except morning fog on the coast
• Arizona weather forecast: Good VFR weather on Monday, marginal VFR Tuesday
Hazard Identification and Risk Analysis
Tricia decides to begin her risk analysis by identifying the potential hazards and associated risks for the flight to Santa Rosa,
using the PA VE checklist. The various hazards and risks may overlap in more than one checklist category, but she wants to
identify all the hazards and risks and may consolidate them later in the process.
Pilot
• She is IFR current, but it has been four months since her last proficiency event. This hazard could increase the risk of
loss of control in IMC.
• If she consumes alcohol, she needs to allow for a minimum of eight hours prior to the planned departure on Tuesday
to be legal. She also needs to be free from any aftereffects from alcohol, which could be magnified by the altitude and
result in dehydration. This hazard could increase errors.
• She has been going to bed late and getting up early in Durango. This fatigue hazard could increase the risk of making
errors.
Aircraft
• She is concerned about the range/payload trade-off for her airplane. Reducing the range by trading fuel weight for
payload could increase the risk of fuel exhaustion.
• Tricia also knows that her aircraft is not approved for flight in known icing conditions and that an icing encounter
could lead to loss of control.
• She is concerned about the takeoff from Animas Air Park at gross weight, considering the runway length. This
potential hazard could create a risk for an overrun or stall after takeoff. Her personal minimums include a 20 percent
additional margin over calculated runway takeoff distance.