Risk Management Handbook (FAA-H-8083-2A)
11891
Figure 3-9. The direct route from Durango to Santa Rosa.
11892
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.
11893
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
11894
Tricia needs to organize, consider, and evaluate all the information.
Pilot and Passengers
11895
The pilot and passenger data is as follows:
11896
• Current under 14 CFR part 61 for VFR and IFR
11897
• Last instrument time logged four months ago
11898
• Tricia's weight is 130 pounds, the Smiths weigh 340 pounds together
11899
• Tricia has 40 pounds of baggage, the Smiths have 80 pounds
Aircraft
11900
The aircraft data is as follows:
11901
• Not certificated for flight in known icing conditions
11902
• Empty weight: 1903 pounds, Maximum gross weight 2,740 pounds
11903
• Luggage compartment carries 120 pounds
11904
• Current fuel 25 gallons (150 pounds) Fuel capacity 64 gallons (384 pounds)
11905
• Average fuel consumption at 10,000 feet: 8.6 gallons per hour
3-13
Risk Management Handbook (FAA-H-8083-2A)
11906
• Average true airspeed at 10,000 feet: 152 knots
11907
• 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
11908
• 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
11909
The following is in addition to weather data mentioned earlier:
11910
• Temperatures at Animas Air Park (00C): 25º C mornings, 35º C afternoons, calm winds
11911
• California weather forecast: Good VFR except morning fog on the coast
11912
• Arizona weather forecast: Good VFR weather on Monday, marginal VFR Tuesday
Hazard Identification and Risk Analysis
11913
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
11914
• 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.
11915
• 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.
11916
• She has been going to bed late and getting up early in Durango. This fatigue hazard could increase the risk of making
errors.
Aircraft
11918
• 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.
16110
• 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.
11917
• 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.
3-14
Risk Management Handbook (FAA-H-8083-2A)
Environment
11919
• The weather system moving in from northwest Colorado is the main environmental hazard affecting the flight to
Santa Rosa. The presence of both convection and icing could increase the risk of loss of control, or if attempting to
stay underneath the clouds in VFR, the risk of CFIT.
11920
• The high, rough terrain in this part of the southwest United States presents a hazard on the route to Santa Rosa. This
requires relatively high cruising altitudes which may approach the performance limits of her airplane.
16111
• The departure airport has no ATC services, although fuel is available. ATC may limit the altitude selection en route,
which could limit an escape from icing conditions.
External Pressures
11921
• The scheduled meetings back in Santa Rosa on Tuesday generate external pressures. The need to be present in
Durango on Monday narrows the departure window to Tuesday morning only. If these pressures are not mitigated, a
forced departure on Tuesday morning will mean dealing with the hazards and associated risks related to the pilot, the
aircraft, and the environment.
11922
As Tricia tallies up the hazards and associated risks for the planned flight to Santa Rosa, she records them on the FRAT, as shown
in Figure 3-10. She needs to assess these risks in terms of their likelihood and severity. She strives to complete the risk analysis
so she can return and discuss the situation with the Smiths.
11924
Figure 3-10. Case study FRAT with risks identified.
11923
The risk assessment and mitigation for this case study will continue in Chapters 4 and 5.
Chapter Summary
11925
Poor risk management is a common factor in many general aviation accidents. Pilots can use the PA VE checklist before flight
to identify hazards. Pilots can use a FRAT to organize identified hazards and associated risks for additional analysis.
3-15
Risk Management Handbook (FAA-H-8083-2A)
Introduction
12063
Once hazards and their associated risks have been identified, they should be assessed to determine the overall risk level presented
by each hazard. This process begins before the flight using the process outlined in the previous chapter. While risk assessment
may seem subjective at first, pilots can learn effective risk-management through routine practice and application.
Risk Assessment Components
12064
Risk is the composite of the likelihood (probability) and the severity (consequences) of a particular outcome. Both likelihood
and severity can vary in magnitude.
Risk Likelihood
12066
The following terms describe the likelihood of an outcome:
12067
• Probable–An event may occur several times.
12068
• Occasional–An event may occur sometime.
12069
• Remote–An event is unlikely to occur but is possible.
12070
• Improbable–An event is highly unlikely to occur.
12071
To illustrate, consider the likelihood of exceeding airframe structural limits if penetrating a thunderstorm. It is likely that the
airframe’s structural limits would be exceeded each time this occurs, making the likelihood “probable.”
12072
As another example, consider a case where a pilot operates at an airport surrounded by rough terrain. The runways are just long
enough to accommodate the aircraft. The possibility exists for a runway overrun on each landing. Given this data, an overrun
could occur sometime, and the likelihood is “occasional.”
Risk Severity
12073
The following terms describe the severity of an outcome.
12074
• Catastrophic–Results in fatalities and/or total airframe loss.
12075
• Critical–Severe injury or major airframe or property damage.
12076
• Marginal–Minor injury or minor airframe or property damage.
12077
• Negligible–Less than minor injury or damage.
12078
To illustrate, consider the example of penetrating a thunderstorm. A loss of control event exceeding airframe structural limits
could result in either severe injuries or fatalities and airframe loss, creating either a “critical” or a “catastrophic” outcome.
12079
In the example of the marginal runway length, an overrun could cause major damage to the aircraft and possible severe injuries,
or a “critical” outcome.
Chapter 4: Assessing Risk
4-1
Risk Management Handbook (FAA-H-8083-2A)
Using a Risk Assessment Matrix
12080
Once risk likelihood and severity have been determined, the pilot may use a tabular matrix to find the composite of these two
parameters. [Figure 4-1]
12081
Catastrophic Critical Marginal Negligible
Improbable
Remote
Occasional
Probable
Risk Assessment Matrix
Likelihood
Severity
Serious LowMedium
Serious
SeriousHigh High
High
Figure 4-1. Risk Assessment Matrix.
12082
Cross-matching the likelihood and severity on the matrix determines the composite risk. A thunderstorm penetration, with
“catastrophic” severity and either “probable” or “occasional” likelihood, constitutes a high (red) risk level. The runway overrun,
with “critical” severity and “occasional” likelihood, constitutes a serious (yellow) risk level.
12088
The medium (green) risk level implies a “go” decision for a planned or ongoing flight. However, in this case, risk should still
be mitigated if possible.
12089
The high (red) or serious (yellow) categories imply “no-go” unless the pilot finds a means to reduce the risk, such that the next
iteration of risk assessment indicates a medium or low risk.
12094
Risk analysis should begin hours, days, or even weeks before a flight. For a simple flight, hours in advance may suffice.
However, for a complex flight with multiple legs or a series of flights over several days, a pilot should begin to consider hazards
and associated risks over an extended time period.
Matrix Errors
12109
When assigning a risk level to a hazard using a matrix, the results could be subject to certain errors.
Accuracy
12111
The matrix provides discrete results that depend on the accurate assignment of likelihood and severity. While conducting a
risk assessment, a pilot may be unsure of the likelihood or severity for a particular risk or find it difficult to choose between
adjacent parameters. In such cases, pilots should apply the more conservative parameter(s), which place the risk at a higher
level. Pilots learning risk analysis should seek the opinion of a more experienced pilot or an instructor if there is any doubt as
to the accuracy of inputs.
Skewing
12110
Pilots sometimes use inputs that skew the risk toward a lower level due to the desire to complete a flight.
Obsolescence
12112
The matrix results lose relevance if the hazards change before a flight departs. Pilots should verify and reevaluate their risk
assessment based on current information and conditions before flight.
4-2
Risk Management Handbook (FAA-H-8083-2A)
Case Study
12113
Note: Refer to the case study section of Chapter 3 if needed.
Risk Assessment Analysis
12114
The pilot, Tricia, identified nine separate hazards and associated risks that will affect a direct non-stop flight from Animas Air
Park (00C) in Colorado to the Santa Rosa, California airport (KSTS). Now, she begins the process of assessing these risks using
PA VE checklist elements.
Pilot
12115
Tricia identified both capability and aeromedical risks. She concludes that reduced IFR proficiency means that a loss of control
in-flight (LOC-I) event is possible although unlikely. A LOC-I event, especially in convection or icing conditions, could result
in a fatal accident. A combination of “remote” likelihood and “catastrophic” severity indicates a serious (yellow) risk on the
risk assessment matrix.
12116
She also self-assessed her aeromedical risks using the IMSAFE checklist and identified alcohol and fatigue as potential hazards.
The risks associated with these hazards could lead to multiple in-flight errors that could result in major damage or injury.
Collectively, she assesses these risks as having “occasional” likelihood and “critical” severity. On the risk assessment matrix,
this combination indicates a serious (yellow) risk. [Figure 4-2]
16112
Flight Risk Assessment Tool
PAVE Area Hazard Risk Likelihood Severity Composite Risk Mitigation Results
Pilot “P”
Capability
Aeromedical
Not IFR proficient
Alcohol and lack of sleep
LOC
Fatigue related errors
remote
occasional
catastrophic
critical serious
serious
Figure 4-2. FRAT excerpt for pilot hazards and associated risks.
Aircraft
12117
She identified three areas that pertain to aircraft-related risk. During a non-stop flight, the likelihood of fuel exhaustion increases
if extensive deviation around weather is needed. Fuel exhaustion over rugged western terrain could result in a fatal accident.
Her assessment results in a “remote” likelihood with “catastrophic” consequences, which indicate a serious (yellow) risk on
the risk assessment matrix.
12118
Tricia also noted that her aircraft is not approved for flight in known icing conditions and that a flight along the planned route
might encounter icing conditions at some point. Even with an “occasional” likelihood, this could generate a CFIT or LOC-I
event with fatalities, or “catastrophic” consequences, thus indicating a high (red) risk on the risk assessment matrix.
12119
Finally, the aircraft may lack the performance needed to depart from the 5,000-foot runway at Animas Air Park. Having the
Smiths on board, everyone’s baggage, and a reduced fuel load would result in a takeoff at the aircraft's maximum gross weight
of 2,740 pounds. The calculated takeoff distance would be 4,700 feet, and using her 20 percent safety factor produces a desired
runway length of 5,640 feet, which exceeds the available runway distance. Under these conditions, Tricia determines that an
overrun is possible at least some of the time and could cause major damage or severe injuries. This “occasional” likelihood and
“critical” severity produces a serious (yellow) risk level from the risk assessment matrix. [Figure 4-3]
16113
Flight Risk Assessment Tool
PAVE Area Hazard Risk Likelihood Severity Composite Risk Mitigation Results
Aircraft “A”
Fuel/Range/Payload
Equipment
Cannot carry full fuel
Not certified for known ice
Fuel exhaustion
LOC
remote
occasional
catastrophic
catastrophic
Performance Marginal takeoff performance Overrun, LOC, or CFIT occasional critical
high
serious
serious
Figure 4-3. FRAT excerpt for aircraft hazards and associated risks.
Environment
12120
She identified three areas with environment-related risk. The weather hazards on the direct route to Santa Rosa include
thunderstorms, icing, and low ceilings. There could be severe turbulence in the convective activity, which covers most of the
route and poses at least an upset potential at some time, producing an “occasional” likelihood. An upset in severe turbulence
4-3
Risk Management Handbook (FAA-H-8083-2A)
could result in a LOC-I event and “catastrophic” fatal accident. The “occasional” likelihood and “catastrophic” severity indicate
a high (red) risk on the risk assessment matrix.
12122
Tricia’s original proposed route traverses some very high and rugged terrain. If she were to attempt to fly under the low ceilings
and weather, the terrain would be a hazard with an associated CFIT risk. A CFIT event, while unlikely for a pilot with her
experience, would still be possible and could result in fatalities. This “remote” likelihood and “catastrophic” severity indicate
a serious (yellow) risk on the risk assessment matrix.
12121
The Animas Air Park elevation of 6,684 feet combined with July temperatures result in a high density altitude, which constitutes
a hazard. The combination of high density altitude and high terrain in the area could lead to a “catastrophic” CFIT accident. This
could occur at least sometime or with “occasional” likelihood. The combination of “occasional” likelihood and “catastrophic”
severity indicate a high (red) risk on the risk assessment matrix.
16114
Flight Risk Assessment Tool
PAVE Area Hazard Risk Likelihood Severity Composite Risk Mitigation Results
Environment “V”
high
high
highWeather
Terrain
Thunderstorms, icing, low ceilings
High terrain
LOC and CFIT
CFIT
occasional
occasional
catastrophic
catastrophic
Airspace, ATC, Airports
Night/Over Water
High density altitude
N/A
CFIT
N/A
occasional catastrophic
Figure 4-4. FRAT excerpt for environment hazards and associated risks.
12124
Both Tricia and Martha face pop-up business events that appear to be critical, and Tricia has agreed to provide a solution to
their transportation requirement.
12125
Tricia feels the pressure to get to Santa Rosa before the Tuesday meeting. The Smiths are good friends, and she does not want to
disappoint them. She feels additional pressure because the Smiths are expected to officiate at the Independence Day festivities
and wish to attend parties that night. They may not be aware of any reason why Tricia could not depart early on Tuesday and
get to Santa Rosa in time for their meetings using a single-engine GA airplane.
12126
She concludes that external pressures are magnifying the identified risks, indicating a “probable” likelihood and “catastrophic”
severity with high (red) risk levels.
12127
Flight Risk Assessment Tool
PAVE Area Hazard Risk Likelihood Severity Composite Risk Mitigation Results
External Pressure “E”
Personal
Business
N/A
Meeting deadlines for myself and Ms. Smith
N/A
Increased risk in all other categories probable catastrophic high
Figure 4-5. FRAT Excerpt for external pressure hazards and associated risks.
16115
She finishes recording her risk assessment analysis [Figure 4-6] and begins determining ways to mitigate the risks (see the case
study section in Chapter 5, Mitigating Risk). She will soon need to discuss the next steps with the Smiths.
4-4
Risk Management Handbook (FAA-H-8083-2A)
16116
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
Not IFR proficient
Alcohol and lack of sleep
LOC
Fatigue related errors
remote
occasional
catastrophic
critical
Fuel/Range/Payload
Equipment
Cannot carry full fuel
Not certified for known ice
Fuel exhaustion
LOC
remote
occasional
catastrophic
catastrophic
Performance Marginal takeoff performance Overrun, LOC, or CFIT occasional critical
Personal
Business
N/A
Meeting deadlines for myself and Ms. Smith
N/A
Increased risk in all other categories probable catastrophic high
high
high
high
high
serious
serious
serious
serious
Weather
Terrain
Thunderstorms, icing, low ceilings
High terrain
LOC and CFIT
CFIT
occasional
occasional
catastrophic
catastrophic
Airspace, ATC, Airports
Night/Over Water
High density altitude
N/A
CFIT
N/A
occasional catastrophic
Figure 4-6. FRAT hazards and associated risks.
Chapter Summary
12128
Risk assessment is a critical element in the risk analysis process. To determine overall risk levels, the pilot assesses both risk
likelihood and risk severity for all identified hazards. The primary tools for this process are the FRAT and the risk assessment
matrix. A pilot’s risk assessment accuracy should improve with practice.
4-5
Risk Management Handbook (FAA-H-8083-2A)
Introduction
12129
Risk mitigation reduces the likelihood or predicted severity of potential effects of hazards. As discussed in Chapter 4, Assessing
Risk, high (red) and serious (yellow) risks should be mitigated. High risks the pilot cannot mitigate should lead to a no-go
decision. Departing with serious risks is also an abnormal situation that calls for additional mitigation. The risk mitigation
process may start days or weeks before a flight and depends on the complexity of the plan.
12090
Air carrier, charter, and fractional operations conducted under 14 CFR parts 121, 135, and 91 Subpart K normally preclude
operations in the serious and high-risk categories. Corporate turbojet operators also typically adhere to this standard. In addition
to regulatory requirements, these operators utilize concepts, procedures, and tools such as safety management systems (SMS)
to ensure risks are identified, assessed, and managed appropriately. General aviation pilots can manage risk in a professional
manner as well. Risks should be managed such that they are mitigated to medium (green) levels or lower.
12130
Risk mitigation may also allow a pilot to undertake or complete a flight that would otherwise be subject to unacceptable risks.
Conversely, the pilot should not depart if the same process reveals safe flight is not possible under the given conditions.
12096
If having a doubt about risk mitigation, a pilot should consider the value of mitigation against the potential cost of property
damage and loss of life. A saying goes, safety costs a lot less than an accident. In fact, risk mitigation makes long-term economic
sense.
Preflight Risk Mitigation Strategies
12143
Pilots choose from a variety of strategies to mitigate risks, and different strategies may apply to different hazards. Nevertheless,
there are a few general strategies that are effective for each area on the PA VE checklist. Pilot, aircraft, and external pressure
risks respond well to early, direct action. On the other hand, the scope of many environmental hazards often favors avoidance
as a mitigation strategy.
Mitigating Pilot Risks
12144
Personal minimums that account for pilot experience and proficiency mitigate some risks. Pilots flying unfamiliar aircraft may
need to raise their personal minimums for that aircraft. When training, pilots can take advantage of scenarios that include risk
management in addition to pilot skill elements. Self-evaluation after a flight may alert a pilot of the need for additional training,
which may also decrease future risk. If there is any doubt concerning the outcome of a flight, the pilot should consider hiring
an instructor or a mentor pilot and making the trip a learning experience.
12145
Use of and careful consideration of the IMSAFE checklist (illness, medication, stress, alcohol, fatigue, emotion) reduces
aeromedical risk.
Mitigating Aircraft Risks
12146
Factoring performance data to create safety margins mitigates some risks. Using an aircraft with redundant systems or an
aircraft with automation that reduces pilot workload also lowers accident risk. Additionally, addressing discrepancies and
conducting proper maintenance can increase reliability and reduce risk. Thorough preflight and postflight inspections also
mitigate aircraft risks.
17393
Carrying enough fuel with a sufficient reserve reduces the likelihood of a low-fuel emergency or a forced landing. On some
flights, planning for a fuel stop reduces that risk.
21906
If the pilot has a choice, the selection of aircraft may reduce risk. The decision may consider the aircraft performance, the
number of engines, known icing capability, and avionics or automation available.
Chapter 5: Mitigating Risk
5-1
Risk Management Handbook (FAA-H-8083-2A)
Mitigating Environmental Risks
12148
Flight in the proximity of some environmental hazards may lead to serious or catastrophic accidents. Avoidance strategies
reduce the risk by lowering the accident likelihood. This requires pilots to plan, exercise patience, remain flexible, and be
creative.
Circumnavigate the Hazard
12149
For some hazards, such as convective activity and very high terrain, a possible mitigation may be a plan to circumnavigate the
hazard.
Go Above or Below the Hazard
12151
Sometimes a plan to fly at a different altitude reduces accident likelihood. Pilots can plan for altitudes that keep the aircraft
above or below icing conditions. Many instrument pilots who operate aircraft that are not approved for flight in known icing
conditions apply personal minimums to avoid conditions below certain temperatures or where the freezing level is at or below
the minimum en-route altitude.
Change Departure Time or Date
12152
Advancing or delaying a departure may reduce risk likelihood. For example, on a day when a line of afternoon thunderstorms
is forecast, a pilot could plan for an early morning departure or wait until the thunderstorms dissipate and depart late in the
afternoon. For some meteorological hazards, such as an incoming low-pressure system, the pilot might choose to depart the day
before originally planned.
Cancel the Flight
12153
Canceling a flight is necessary if the pilot cannot mitigate risk sufficiently by other means. The cancellation option is easier if
another means of transportation is available or if long-term rescheduling is an option.
Mitigating External Pressure Risks
12154
External pressures can be either subtle or overt. Because it may involve passengers or others waiting for the arrival, it is best to
inform them of the need for flexibility.
Local Versus Transportation Flights
12155
A local pleasure flight can still be subject to external pressures, but it is easier to cancel than a scheduled flight related to
transportation to an event. When planning a local flight with friends, for example, the pilot can reduce external pressures
by telling them in advance that the flight could be canceled at the last minute due to weather or other reasons. For an IFR
transportation flight, persons meeting the flight can use an application to know if the flight will arrive as planned. For a VFR
flight anyone meeting the flight may wait at home and get notified after the flight arrives.
Personal Versus Business Flights
12156
Pilots who fly business associates may feel significant external pressures. The pilot should manage passenger expectations and
may plan for alternative travel options as a means to reduce risk.
Case Study
12157
Note: Refer to the case study supporting data in Chapter 3, Identifying Hazards and Associated Risks, and the risk assessment
matrix in Chapter 4, Assessing Risk, to continue the risk mitigation phase of the case study.
Risk Mitigation Analysis
12158
Tricia diligently identified the hazards and assessed the risks of her proposed flight from Durango, CO to Santa Rosa, CA. She
should now mitigate the high and serious risks that she identified during the assessment phase. She identified four high and five
serious risks that she should attempt to mitigate by reducing risk likelihood, severity, or both.
12159
Tricia starts by reconsidering the overall plan for this flight. She rules out making a non-stop flight because carrying the Smiths
and their baggage would require a reduced fuel load, which in this case is a serious (yellow) risk. In addition, the direct route
could lead to encounters with thunderstorms, icing conditions, areas of low ceilings, and high terrain. Furthermore, she realizes
they should leave Monday morning, rather than Tuesday, because of the incoming front and low-pressure area. She also notes
5-2