IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i2p1693-d1037259.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Flight Training Risk Identification and Assessment Based on the HHM-RFRM Model

Author

Listed:
  • Hong Sun

    (Flight Technology and Flight Safety Research Base, Civil Aviation Flight University of China, Guanghan 618307, China)

  • Fangquan Yang

    (School of Airport, Civil Aviation Flight University of China, Guanghan 618307, China)

  • Peiwen Zhang

    (School of Economics and Management, Civil Aviation Flight University of China, Guanghan 618307, China)

  • Yunxiang Zhao

    (Flight Training Standards Branch, Civil Aviation Flight University of China, Guanghan 618307, China)

Abstract

Due to the unavoidable operational risks and insufficient risk management capabilities of beginner pilots in flight training, the challenge of risk control in aviation schools has become increasingly prominent. To ensure the safety of flight training in aviation schools and to reduce costs and increase revenue, the essential prerequisite for improving efficiency is risk management. Therefore, it is necessary to explore risk identification and assessment methods. This paper adopts the holographic modeling (HHM) method and risk filtering, rating and management (RFRM) theory. First, the HHM idea is used to construct a risk identification framework (HHM-PAVE) for flight training. Second, based on the dual criteria, multiple criteria and cloud model (CM) in the RFRM approach, an improved risk assessment matrix-cloud model (IPC-CM) is proposed and combined with the N-K model and Bayes’ theorem to propose a coupled risk scenario hazard measurement model (CR-HM) based on the HHM-RFRM approach in risk assessment. In the assessment process, the impact of risk factors on system stability as well as the uncertainty problem and coupling–risk quantification problem in expert assessment are considered to obtain scientific and objective quantitative assessment results. Finally, the risk identification and assessment experiments were conducted using HHM-RFRM on the flight training. The results show that the method can more accurately identify critical risk factors in a flight training system and provide a new perspective for risk prevention and control.

Suggested Citation

  • Hong Sun & Fangquan Yang & Peiwen Zhang & Yunxiang Zhao, 2023. "Flight Training Risk Identification and Assessment Based on the HHM-RFRM Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-20, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:2:p:1693-:d:1037259
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/2/1693/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/2/1693/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stan Kaplan & Yacov Y. Haimes & B. John Garrick, 2001. "Fitting Hierarchical Holographic Modeling into the Theory of Scenario Structuring and a Resulting Refinement to the Quantitative Definition of Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(5), pages 807-807, October.
    2. Stanley Kaplan & B. John Garrick, 1981. "On The Quantitative Definition of Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(1), pages 11-27, March.
    3. Tamasi, Galileo & Demichela, Micaela, 2011. "Risk assessment techniques for civil aviation security," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(8), pages 892-899.
    4. Yacov Y. Haimes & Stan Kaplan & James H. Lambert, 2002. "Risk Filtering, Ranking, and Management Framework Using Hierarchical Holographic Modeling," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(2), pages 383-397, April.
    5. Oster, Clinton V. & Strong, John S. & Zorn, C. Kurt, 2013. "Analyzing aviation safety: Problems, challenges, opportunities," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 148-164.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. James H. Lambert & Rachel K. Jennings & Nilesh N. Joshi, 2006. "Integration of risk identification with business process models," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(3), pages 187-198, September.
    2. James H. Lambert & Benjamin L. Schulte & Priya Sarda, 2005. "Tracking the complexity of interactions between risk incidents and engineering systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(3), pages 262-277, September.
    3. Ioanna Ioannou & Jaime E. Cadena & Willy Aspinall & David Lange & Daniel Honfi & Tiziana Rossetto, 2022. "Prioritization of hazards for risk and resilience management through elicitation of expert judgement," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 112(3), pages 2773-2795, July.
    4. Barry M. Horowitz & Yacov Y. Haimes, 2003. "Risk‐based methodology for scenario tracking, intelligence gathering, and analysis for countering terrorism," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(3), pages 152-169.
    5. Maria Leung & James H. Lambert & Alexander Mosenthal, 2004. "A Risk‐Based Approach to Setting Priorities in Protecting Bridges Against Terrorist Attacks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(4), pages 963-984, August.
    6. Barry Charles Ezell, 2007. "Infrastructure Vulnerability Assessment Model (I‐VAM)," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 571-583, June.
    7. Gregory A. Lamm & Yacov Y. Haimes, 2002. "Assessing and managing risks to information assurance: A methodological approach," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(4), pages 286-314.
    8. Wenjun Zhang & Yingjun Zhang & Weiliang Qiao, 2022. "Risk Scenario Evaluation for Intelligent Ships by Mapping Hierarchical Holographic Modeling into Risk Filtering, Ranking and Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-18, February.
    9. Elizabeth B. Connelly & Lisa M. Colosi & Andres F. Clarens & James H. Lambert, 2015. "Risk Analysis of Biofuels Industry for Aviation with Scenario‐Based Expert Elicitation," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(2), pages 178-191, March.
    10. Yacov Y. Haimes, 2012. "Systems‐Based Guiding Principles for Risk Modeling, Planning, Assessment, Management, and Communication," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(9), pages 1451-1467, September.
    11. Matthew H. Henry & Yacov Y. Haimes, 2009. "A Comprehensive Network Security Risk Model for Process Control Networks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(2), pages 223-248, February.
    12. Amro Nasr & Oskar Larsson Ivanov & Ivar Björnsson & Jonas Johansson & Dániel Honfi, 2021. "Towards a Conceptual Framework for Built Infrastructure Design in an Uncertain Climate: Challenges and Research Needs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-19, October.
    13. Yacov Y. Haimes & Alfred Anderegg, 2015. "Sequential Pareto‐Optimal Decisions Made During Emergent Complex Systems of Systems: An Application to the FAA NextGen," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(1), pages 28-44, January.
    14. Clyde Chittister & Yacov Y. Haimes, 2010. "Harmonizing high performance computing (HPC) with large‐scale complex systems in computational science and engineering," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(1), pages 47-57, March.
    15. Jalal Ali & Joost R. Santos, 2015. "Modeling the Ripple Effects of IT‐Based Incidents on Interdependent Economic Systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(2), pages 146-161, March.
    16. Henrik Hassel & Alexander Cedergren, 2019. "Exploring the Conceptual Foundation of Continuity Management in the Context of Societal Safety," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(7), pages 1503-1519, July.
    17. Kenneth G. Crowther & Yacov Y. Haimes, 2005. "Application of the inoperability input—output model (IIM) for systemic risk assessment and management of interdependent infrastructures," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(4), pages 323-341.
    18. Yacov Y Haimes, 2012. "Strategic Preparedness for Recovery from Catastrophic Risks to Communities and Infrastructure Systems of Systems," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(11), pages 1834-1845, November.
    19. Jia-ni Zhao & Li-na Shi & Li Zhang, 2017. "Application of improved unascertained mathematical model in security evaluation of civil airport," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 8(3), pages 1989-2000, November.
    20. Michael J. Pennock & Yacov Y. Haimes, 2002. "Principles and guidelines for project risk management," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(2), pages 89-108.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:2:p:1693-:d:1037259. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.