yesterday, tsa's been talking about the transformation away from a one size fits all security model and really moving towards a risk-based, intelligence-driven security model. so what i thought i'd talk through today is just a couple specifics about what that really means to you, some of the programs that you're becoming more familiar with, tsa precheck, sort of dhs trusted traveler programs being connected, known crew member and then a couple other additional initiatives i'd like to give you awareness of outside the airport domain. let's talk about the philosophy of what risk-based security is. so in a world of limited resources, the effort behind risk-based security is really about the most effective security in the most efficient way. so what that means with the development of programs, policies and plans is everything that we're doing should do three things. does it improve security?

does it create efficiencies in the system? and does it reduce the burden on operators. if the initiatives that we're working on today under the risk-based security construct don't do one of those three things, then we're not doing something right. and as we talked about precheck and known crew member, international inbound air cargo screening and some efforts with general air aviation, you'll see those plans online with those three priorities. talk first about known crew member. this is a great success story in partnership, particularly with our friends at alpa, also with airlines for america. as captain talked a few moments ago, back in 2008 we started with three locations under the crewpass construct. we have grown that program significantly past the pilot phase and now are sitting with 18 locations here in the month of august this year, and we will be at 33 locations by -- 31 locations by november 1st. part of the principle behind known crew member is really

taking a look from a trust standpoint at what's our level of trust and confidence with populations based on additional security measures, background checks, intelligence reporting, security threat assessments? do we have populations in the screening environment that we can move away from a one size fits all and do more of a risk-based security so that we don't do as much physical security at the airport because of all the prescreening and security validation that we have before the individual arrives at the the airport? obviously, the first population that comes to mind is those men and women that are trusted to fly our commercial aircraft. so through the partnership with alpa, we are committed to the known crew member program. for those of you that have had the opportunity to use it, i'm sure you've enjoyed the experience. as i talked about from three priorities -- improving security, creating efficiencies is and reducing the burden on operators -- we are doing all three of those through the known crew member program. the way that we are harnessing the power of the cass system and verifying day of departure the

eligibility, the photo and currency of that crew member processing through the checkpoint is a level of security we've significantly improved from the old process through the checkpoint. as i indicated, we're going to be at 31 locations by november 1st. those 31 locations represent most of the largest airports and the largest domicile areas in the country. we'll be working with alpa and a3a as we -- a4a as we look for additional locations in 2013, but we're also excited about our opportunity to include flight attendants. you may have seen the announcement on that in the last couple of weeks in a partnership with alpa, a4a and others in the flight coalition, we're excited about bringing uniform flight attendants into the known crew member program as well either later this year or early next year. let's talk a little bit now about tsa precheck. for those of you who have been traveling off company status or have been traveling through the purchase ticket process, you may have seen information about tsa precheck. tsa precheck is tsa's first big

step, our first initiative in really trying to get away from a one size fits all security process at the checkpoint itself for the regular traveler. we are currently today at 21 locations across the country, our 20th location was st. louis, our 21st location was actually earlier this week at indianapolis, and we are on track to be at 35 locations, 35 of the nation's largest airports and travel markets, by the end of the calendar year. what precheck is for those of you that are not particular with this, this is a process in which customers are able to voluntarily become eligible for tsa precheck which is an advance type of security screening so that when you get to the airport, you're afforded to have the opportunity -- to have expedited screening including a dedicated lane when we value candidate the eligibility for precheck in the encoding on the boarding pats. the experience that those travelers receive enables them to leave their shoes on, their belt on in most cases, light

outer garments, and you're able to keep your liquids and electronics in your bag. for the folks who have used tsa precheck to date, obviously, very strong, positive feedback from customers as they use that. and as we talk about security, we always talk about improving security, creating efficiencies in the system and reducing the burden on operators. one of the things that we're trying to explain a little bit better is the amount of security that we can do from a voluntary standpoint. if passengers are willing to share information about themselves before they travel, we're doing that through the eligible frequent flyer programs now. we're also doing that through the u.s. citizen members of cbp's trusted traveler program like global entry, nexus and zen try. if people are willing to share information about themselves, go through the process of becoming a dhs-trusted holder, we should be able to leverage that trust and confidence on those folks through a prescreening process so when they get to the airport, we're not doing as many physical

things as we would have in the regular process. so we're excited about the continued partnership with the airlines, with cbp. we are looking at additional populations for 2013 to continue to expand the program, but we are very excited about the opportunity this will give us at the checkpoint long term from an efficiency standpoint to reprogram some of our staff, equipment and procedures towards some of the locations at the checkpoint that perhaps we want to look more for dangerous and deadly types of things. i mentioned that we are going to be at 35 locations by the end of the calendar year. that is through a partnership with five major u.s. airlines. that's american, delta, united, us airways and alaska airlines. we are looking for 2013 to have at least two additional carriers join the program. so as we talk about risk-based security, we're talking about moving away from the one size fits all, we've talked about precheck, we've talked about known crewmember.

again, these are ways to get populations of people that we have higher and confidence with because of information that they have volunteered or information that we have on file already out of the regular screening process and put them through an expedited security process because of the amount of verification and validation that's been done on the front end. some other programs, other initiatives that we've taken underway as part of the risk-based security construct, we've made modifications for this summer for children under 12. screening-related procedural changes to facilitate children under 12 at the checkpoint. we've also made modifications for adults over 75. again, screening modifications at the checkpoint. all of this ties together that as we head towards 2013, we want to be able to start to intersect the risk-based security initiatives so that we're really able to generate back some of the efficiencies in the system. i'll talk briefly about international air cargo because we seem to talk a lot about things at the airport because they're more visible. the coordination and

collaboration with a4a, the u.s. airlines, our friends at cbp, one of the things we've been looking at for some time is a way to take the risk-based security model into the international air cargo environment. um, much like we're doing with tsa precheck, our ability to know about shippers, to know about packages and to have levels of trust with those who do business regularly with cbp and with the carriers, we're looking at a construct for international inbound cargo that those shippers who volunteer information about themselves, who participate in cbp's programs, who share information regularly, that have good account standing, that we're able to use different screening protocols and different measures with those shipping partners and those forwarders than we would for someone, perhaps, shipping personal goods. so the construct of improving security, creating efficiencies and reducing the burden on operators cascades over into some of the other programs. i know they'll probably be

talking about that a little later in the panel. i just want to paint a picture for you that regardless of the mode of transportation that tsa's partnering with or regardless of the population whether it's a package, whether it's a process or whether it's a person, our ability to get information about things in advance in a voluntary compliance fashion to allow us to make good, intelligence-driven, risk-based decisions before the sreening process begins, that's really the target for us to be a more effective and efficient security agency. so i thank you for your time, and we'll stand by at the end for questions. thanks very much. [applause] >> good morning. my name is elizabeth shaver, and i work for airlines 4 america handling cargo services. we are a trade association, we carry about 90% of the u.s. cargo and passenger traffic in the world today, and i should have a presentation coming up

here shortly. here we go. so i'd like to take just a couple minutes at first to talk about the role of air cargo today. although only 1 percent of the weight of cargo is carried by aircraft, it represents 35% of the value of shipments that are transported. air cargo's key to u.s. export competitiveness. $424 billion worth of good left the u.s. by air last year, that's over 100 times the value per kilo of that which left by ocean, and one often overlooked aspect is the support it provides to passenger carriers. in 2011, which is a year when the profitability of u.s. carriers fell to 0.2% from 2.2% the previous year, 21% of passenger airline revenue came from cargo. without cargo in the picture, passenger carriers would be facing significantly increased economic pressure, most likely to result in higher fares and reduced route offerings.

looking at the types of products that travel by air, it's the high-value goods. so it's perishables, the flowers that you buy for your mom on mother's day and your wife on valentine's day, the strawberries that you can get in the grocery store in december, the wild alaskan salmon that's available daily, live animals, emergency arts for repair and medical equipment, pharmaceuticals and live human organs for transplant. air cargo plays a key role in just in time logistics providing 24-72-hour access to intercontinental markets. turning to security specifically, um, as has already been mentioned by several of my, of my colleagues up here, we've made significant progress in the past decade in securing the air cargo chain. access controls, distinguishing known trade parties from unknown, improved screening

procedures in technology and especially for cargo, expanding oversight of the u.s. supply chain through programs such as tsa's regulation of indirect air carriers known as freight forwarders, tsa's certified cargo screening facility program which allows screening to take place earlier in the supply chain prior to arrival at the airport. and as was already mentioned, customs and border protection's custom trade partnership against terrorism which certifies the import chains of trusted trade parties. but our resources are not infinite, and so today we're definitely seeing a move from, as has been mentioned, one size fits all, prescriptive approaches to more risk-based, outcomes-focus, intelligence approaches, ones that are able to respond more quickly to emerging threats and that are sufficiently flexible to allow them to be implemented operationally in an efficient manner. i would like to talk specifically about one of those initiatives that's already been

mentioned, air cargo advanced screening known as acas. it is done extremely efficiently by utilizing existing systems and existing processes in the industry. this slide tribes the existing system -- describes the existing system of today mandated by the 2002 trade act. all air carriers are required to report the details of shipments that they transport to the united states via the air automated manifest system. this data must be delivered to the system four hours minimum prior to aircraft arrival in the u.s., and it's fed into the automated targeting system which performs a risk analysis of the shipment based on three key factors. one is known derogatory information about the data that's being transmitted which involves shipper information and shipment information itself. second is developing threat streams. and third is simply the ability of the system to crunch huge amounts of international trade data to be able to identify

anomalous shipments and tag them. when they're tagged, the importing carrier must hold the shipment at the arrival port for inspection by cbp. but, of course, the yemen incident in 2010 pointed to the fact that getting this information four hours prior to the aircraft arrival in the u.s. was not early enough, that we wanted to get it preloading. this point was made both by tsa and cbp to the u.s. department, sorry, the u.s. senate homeland security committee in testimony in november 2010, shortly after the yemen incident. industry and government immediately began working together to figure out a way to get this predeparture data. basically, what has been done is an extra step has been cobbled on to the front of the existing area in that system. cargo data is delivered as early as possible into the system before it is known which flight it will travel on and often

before it is known even which airline it will travel on. the targeting system runs its analysis, and shipments that require additional screening or additional data are tagged. cbp and tsa then work with the party who is in possession of the shipment in order to clear that hold before loading onto a u.s.-bound flight. one of the beauties of acas, i'm sure you're all aware there's a continuing dialogue about which security measures should apply to all cargo aircraft. that debate is always ongoing, but acas cuts across all of that debate and eliminates the question. it applies to every shipment that travels into the u.s. although it's a voluntary pilot program right now, we expect it to be mandatory within a year or two, so all cargo will be screened ithis fashion. shifting gears to look at acas in a bigger picture, we're primarily interested in securing

the global supply chain for two main reasons. first, american crews, passengers, cargo and physical assets aren't just found on flights that arrive in or depart from the u.s. they're found on flights throughout the world. it's great that we've secured our flights, for example, from frankfurt to chicago, but we'd prefer that all of our flights be secured including connects flights. achieving that requires that we're able to extend robust security stands beyond that last line of departure into the united states, robust standards such as those the transportation security administration has set. second, the supply chain is a chain, and air carriers are a link in that chain, but they're not the only link. we're definitely one of the most compliant links of the chain. we certainly value regulatory compliance and insuring the safety of our aircraft, but that doesn't mean there aren't other trustworthy partners in the supply chain that we can leverage to push our robust security standards even further out into the world well beyond

that last flight into the u.s. in fact, for air carriers we would prefer that we secure those shipments prior to their even arriving at the first airport of departure. the surest way to keep suspicious packages off aircraft is to make sure they don't get into the airport warehouse in the first place. sorry, this is a rogue slide. we'll be skipping it. how acas fits into this global supply chain picture is by allowing the leverage of enhanced screening based on this advanced data. the ideal world is that the earliest possible point in the supply chain data is delivered to acas and, hence, to the automated targeting system by the parties who have the best knowledge of that shipment data which would be the shippers, the freight forwarders and potentially the importers. acas targeting would return a screening result back to the origin station allowing the earliest trusted party in the supply chain to perform the necessary screening or additional measures to insure ha

that shipment is not a threat. once screened and cleared, the shipment would travel then through a secured supply chain to destination. this is -- what is key is that we would avoid the need to rescreen the sipment at -- shipment at points along that supply chain hub which is the case today. this is the key goal of air carriers because this rescreening involves breaking down and opening up what were previously secure palettes of cargo. that introduces another opportunity not just for tampering, but also loss, damage and other problems with the cargo. one thing that has been noted multiple times and multiple forums is that acas has been a game changer in the way it's been implemented. as of midnight on august 7th, 29,901,212 shipments have undergone predeparture screening, and all of this

accomplished with no regulatory mandate. all participation is completely voluntary. when acas began with it first transmissions in december 2010, no one imagined how successful it would be and how many participants it would attract. because it has been designed to work with existing operational processes of carriers, it's not burdensome for carriers to implement, and it makes it attractive, therefore, for them to participate and get the huge security benefit that it provides for their aircraft. at the heart of acas' success is that it really thinks outside the box. it's willing to try out various options for different business models to see which works best via experimentation and empirical evidence. and to a remarkable degree, all parties have come to the table in acas with very few preconceived notions of how things should be and putting everything out on the table for open discussion and end testing. we think it's an ideal model for security developments in the future. industry should be engaged at the very beginning stages in order to leverage our expertise,

to insure that regulators have a full understanding of the full picture of what they're attempting to regulate and to insure that operationally-workable systems are implemented, that trade partners will be happy to implement as opposed to resisting. we've got to work together to use all of our smarts, to leverage all of our resources and to get maximum creativity in order to defeat those who would do us harm, the evillersdo canns we've been talking about today. looking at the big picture and how we're doing in securing the supply chain, there's been tremendous progress. starting from the very bottom of the slide, industry participation in the acas initiative has shown how this industry engagement doesn't just benefit industry, it also benefits the regulators, and it results in positive security outcomes. putting in place more formal structures to insure that this sort of industry/government cocreation takes place on a regular basis can only help us

in the future. great progress has been made to insure that customs authorities and security authorities are working together to harmonize their program when they go out to industry, and individual governments are also working more closely with each other to align their security requirements to insure that they're robust enough so they can mutually recognize each other's programs. and at the international level, the standard-setting bodies of ikeo and the world customs organizations are working closely to harmonize their security-related programs and are even planning on issuing harmonized guy dance on how to implement a customs/security program that does not have overlapping requirements and functions efficiently. and on that positive note, i would like to the thank you for your attention, especially thank fred for the invitation and alpa for the chance to speak today. thank you. [applause]

>> good morning. i'd like to thank captain eissle r and everyone from alpa for having us here today. u.s. customs and border protection was create with the the creation of the department of homeland security by merging u.s. customs service, u.s -- the inspections division of the immigration naturalization service and the border division of the u.s. department of agriculture. this has created an agency that has a very multifaceted role, and all of these roles are based almost wholly on layered approach and strategy to securing the border. our primary mission is to prevent terrorists and their weapons from entering the united states while facilitating legitimate trade and travel and the industry of legitimate travelers and cargo to the united states.

this is, obviously, two sides of a coin. it's a very difficult task, one that is impossible without working with our partners at tsa and other agencies which i'll explain in a moment. there are 60,000 cbp employees, we have three operational divisions. our air marine division covers the skies, and what more can you say about that to a group of pilots? border patrol agents protect the u.s. between ports of entry, and cbp officers work at the ports of entry themselves. today i'm going to focus on what cbp officers are doing because they are the officers who you will encounter when you enter the united states, and they're also the officers looking beyond the united states to see what's coming before it actually gets onboard your aircraft. directly after the 9/11 attacks, then-commissioner bonner of the

u.s. customs service started a layered approach or had a vision for a layered approach starting with the maritime environment. we called it the container security initiative. this was a very successful program where we started placing cbp officers at seaports of exit that had container ships coming to the united states. that strategy was successful enough that it evolved into the passenger and now the express cargo, express consignment air cargo arena through programs such as the information advisory program and the acas program which liz just driebd. we -- described. we use these in addition to other items of intelligence gathering such as the advance passenger information system where the flight manifests are transmitted to us electronically, and we take the pnr data, and we place them into various databases that allows us to more efficiently target and cut down the numbers of people that we have to inspect.

so we go from 100% inspection of all passengers and cargo back to a more risk-based, targeted approach. this allows us to focus our efforts on the true people who are at a much higher risk for being an evildoer. we work with, um, obviously, multitude of agencies, federal, local and state. i've listed some out here for you. tsa's major partner. we work directly with them, obviously, at airports, but also in the cargo arena. we really have two sort of structures for both passenger and cargo, both of which use this layered approach where we have both information and officers outside the united states starting the process and looking. liz mentioned the customs trade partnership against terrorism. this is a trade-based approach where we, where our trade partners, shippers, exporters,

carriers voluntarily partner with us, and we send supply chain security specialists to the point of shipping and manufacturing and beyond. the joke is we actually go to where the grain is grown before it becomes beer. to have it shipped to the united states. and we look at how the security features, how it's shipped, how the truck -- what routes the trucks take before they actually get to the ship so that we know -- or the aircraft -- so that we know what's getting on, the mode of conveyance is going to be safe before it even gets in the air. we do this by working with international partners as well. again, we'll go through some of the systems we use in our layered approach. advance passenger information system is really the cornerstone of how we do business for passengers. it's the way we know who's getting on the plane when they get on the plane. the electronic system for travel authorization or esta is our way of knowing who's going to board

the aircraft for non-u.s. citizens who are coming to the united states under our visa waiver program. so when you're talking about passengers, you have people who are not u.s. citizen ises that either have a visa or do not. there are certain countries which can come to the united states in a visa-free status with no visa or prior application. before esta, we did not know who these people were before they got onboard your aircraft, and we had no way of vetting them. with esta we do now have a way of vetting them before they even book their flight. the immigration advisory program where we actually take cbp officers and place them in foreign airports, and they work directly with our foreign counterparts to help screen the flights as they get on, as passengers board, but also to take information that we gain from pnr, apis and various other

databases and transmit that information to our partners for action on that side. model ports initiative, this allows us to have a welcoming environment and facilitate the entry of passengers as they arrive in the united states. we have preclearance locations throughout canada, the caribbean, ireland, preclearance is quite an old program, it's been around since the 1950s, and it's very effective. our canadian partners are very happy with it. the student exchange visitor' system, interestingly enough, after the crisis with iran back in the '70s, congress came to customs -- or to immigration, excuse me, and said who are all the students in the united states? and we said, we don't know. so starting in the '70s, we started recording this information. and after 9/11, obviously, we had to come up with a better mode of keeping track of it. and the student exchange visitor system was created. it's been very effective, and on the other side it's facilitating

legitimate students to enter the united states in a much more effective manner. global entry, which i'll speak to in just a moment, u.s. visitor and immigrant status allows us to match up visa applicants as the same person who applied for the visa, so it cuts down on the amount of fraud we see at our borders. and u.s. visit. so we partner with many different organizations in order to effect these programs. and, again, the idea is we know who's getting onboard your aircraft before they get on. we want to know what's being loaded onto your aircraft before it's loaded. this allows us to effectively stop the bad guys while affecting the entry of legitimate entry of travelers and cargo. again, vetting people and things before they're put onboard your aircraft, that's the goal. we have to have continual vigilance. this never stops. it is a 24/7 operation and worldwide, and we have to -- the

idea is to focus our enforcement efforts. you saw a lot of numbers as far as more than 20,000 cbp officers, 20,000 border patrol agents. we still have to focus our efforts on where we can be most effective. i put this picture in my presentation, this was the christmas day incident in detroit on delta aircraft. those are cbp officers, we were the first responders taking him off. that incident is what started us looking at before things get on the aircraft. it completely changed the way we looked at security. ..

membership and global entry allows you eight tsa preach check program at selected airports. it also gives the option of enrollment and department state traveler. enrollment program it's really easy to join and it allows for mean secure vetting of of what dance. we do a continual vetting process on global entry members so if there is a change in the risk status they are preferred for secondary inspection when they come through so it's not a one-shot deal were continually get the names. to enroll it's very simple you start a process online by going to globalentry.gov or cbp.gov.

the fee is $100 for the term, and then on approval from the electronic system will be given the approval, asked to schedule an appointment of the global enrollment center which is most airports that coastal entry. the interview generally lasts 20 minutes, and to our and member of global intrigue. the issue is global entry card but you don't need it when you present your passport will recognize you are a global entry member. global entry is open to all u.s. citizens, lawful permanent residents as of right now citizens, korean citizens, exit and nationals, canadian citizens and residents can use goebel entry for the next program, but the foreign members right now, the dutch, koreans, mexicans have to be members in their host countries where we have the pool betting systems so we have a good secure vetting on each member. as you can see there are more

reasons why someone might be a knowledgeable than nationalities that are eligible. i won't go through all of them for the sake of time, but they are obvious reasons why one might become ineligible and less than obvious reasons, but obviously we do vetting on every circuit, not just criminal but for trusted traveler purposes so we know who you are. you can use it and most major airports in the united states. we just added guam is also it's fairly widespread. we are expending those airports every day. i want to thank although few for your time coming and happy to take any questions. thank you. [applause] >> i'd like to thank our panelists very much for such outstanding thought-provoking inside and presentations, and right now i'd like to open up the floor to some questions.

>> and good morning. i'm a captain in the international and this is all over the world. this is for doug hofsass. as we get out of this screen philosophy it's going to take an awful lot of guts to fight what is happening in the world. would you see as the biggest challenge in that? >> is this on? i'm sorry, what world did you say? >> the pc world, the politically correct. there's an awful lot of pushback and i would like to hear your thoughts on that. >> sure. one of the principles of the program has been as we started out in 2012, giving folks the opportunity to voluntarily submit information about themselves and volunteer

information about themselves to the u.s. government before traveling. even a discussion about international air cargo is a similar discussion because you have a non-regulated environment industry leaning forward with shippers and for workers to value information ahead of time. the promise is really if we have populations that are already at the adjusted or we have members of the toppling public that want to volunteer information about themselves or perhaps become a member of one of dhs's trusted traveler programs, the base of our program is about the low where's traveler who had nothing to hide novelette her wrist watch list whoses i'm willing to submit to the additional vetting. as we look into the program in 2013, we've identified frankly additional populations beyond what we have today that we think would be great candidates for

tsa pre-czech and other programs. if you look at we dead with known crimber it is a very similar construct to think about all of the vetting delegation we have on the uniform crewmembers that are active, that is a lot of pre-screening work to faludi to those people are coming to make sure they are on good standing, they are not on any list and their static is checked like the cbp program continually. so if there's any change in status, we have that. our program is about individuals willing to share information about themselves with the government so they can receive an expedited screening process, which then in turn helps us because we can program some of those resources to the high-risk targets or individuals. >> thank you. >> thanks for the question. >> good morning. this is a question also for mr. hofsass. in the past, tsa approached aviation security with implemented combined response from the offices of security

operations, intelligence and transportation sector network management, which is involved in the current office of security policy and the industry engagement. you've recently named to the assistant minister for risk-based security. can you explain please how oioso and the other divisions integrate their efforts with respect to developing and implementing tsa's risk-based approach? >> sure. so, i talked about the agency's transformation efforts. for those of you that herd jon pistole talk about the transformation, this is an agency white transformation. it goes across all of our operational support elements. we are together as a senior leadership team finding a way to run a more efficient and more effective security agency. part of but talks through the process of as we develop policies, procedures, programs, plans, even acquisitions are the decisions we are making in are

the programs and policies that were implementing going after those three founding principles i talk about, does it improve security, does it create efficiency in the system and reduce the burden on the operators or the traveling public? that is the temmins all of us at the senior leadership level focus on as we bring the proposal to the table or work as a team on decisions. the role of the risk-based security office is about leading a unified effort across the agency for the transformation. those individuals who are working on policy, those individuals and operations, those procuring and installing technology but also while enforcement. many of our support components are of the end of mentors and the operators of the design, and the design really is that if we policies, programs, operations and procurements with the mindset of improving security, creating efficiencies in the system and reducing the burden on operators in the traveling public, that's going to actually

be the transformation of tsa, a way from a one size security agency to the counterintelligence risk agency. >> thank you. >> sure. >> captain mike moss and interregional safety coordinator for airline pilots association. a question for the group. as we all know flight crew members both in the cockpit and cabin provide possibly the last line of defense against terrorist activities in our aircraft. during her recurrent training, little information regarding current specific events in our own fleet are passed along to us for review and discussion to evade such information, in my opinion, would further enhance our ability to detect and normal situation and have model passenger behavior. what can be done to increase the amount of information given to

us crewmembers regarding current specific threats encountered in our own aircraft? >> will handle part of that. i think we recognize that and we have been working hard to come from that issue. part of the way we do it is with the ffdo we have a web form we've hurston formation we can and obviously there's an issue with posting a classified information or officials use only information, but i think that we have been bringing some of the ceos and detractors of security into the tsa for regular intelligence briefings, then when we have an actual event we have a different process that we work with to go back when we have an event that's a security related evin that we think is of national consequence. we have invested for broadcasting that to all the planes that are in the air, so we have worked hard to try to come from that issue. some of the challenges with

regard to level of information we have, but we have you since we do hard to leave to work hard to get them and the various methods we have an established now we are always working hard to try to improve those methods. >> anybody else? >> actually i have a question. >> my name is james, national council. my question has to do with sms. can you tell us how the mission's official in process are schedule and how complex of a program that is? the reason i ask is lately i have been seeing sam's added to the aircraft last minute in the situation in first class and it's becoming very obvious when engaged, and people ought to the gate and trying to make it not obvious we have additional people in first class. but at the same time, people are starting to pick up on we have

federal marshals in the aircraft. >> well, we've changed in the last several years as you diluted to we've changed the ordering process for the federal air marshals. what you have heard to is what we all suffer with, is that we have what we think is a very complex and a good scheduling program, but we are also subject to the same vagaries that you have with regard to the weather, delayed flights a short connections that are on forseen. we always try to build an ample connection time for the flight. but as we all know, sometimes that doesn't work for a variety of reasons. the basic foundations we have for the scheduling program we have had several different external agencies will get that to see how we can improve it. we think we have a good program where we are looking to tweak it. but the foundation is to the same issues most people know whether that causes most of the delay we are talking about. fighting when we do have instances leading heart

abnormalities we try to work with the carriers and the liaison with the should be an exception to the rule. >> de wind follow up? on the risk-based idea, how or special events looked at and scheduled? certain flights that are pretty common d.c. is a pretty common area. sometimes -- how far does risk-based the way to this idea of special events and the scheduling purposes? >> we work with our partner agencies with the special events, whether it is a national level event where we call national security event because we hold government structure to look at the risk involved with that event, and what resources are put to that event. so we do work again very closely with her is the fbi or partners in the intelligence community in the leadership team. but there's a coordinated effort to look at a special event, the level of risk and resources.

in the 80's as planned out most special events are not supplied to us so we are able to plan for that. i think there is a great deal of forethought in to that level of resources tsa and not just the federal air marshal service. >> thank you very much. >> hirsi fi coordinator for canada. i would like to congratulate all the agencies and members of the panel for the program they do have in place right now and expanding them to make it easier for the traveling public to access your plans both in the u.s. and for foreign people, canada included. what i would like to ask, and it's been asked on previous before in similar venues, we still do not have any sort of a cross border cooperation with respect to the crew members for

canadian carriers flying in u.s. ports were u.s. carriers into canadian ports. as a similar system to the crew paths were known crewmember of any of these things. what is the status of that in your organization, and i guess that is directed mostly to mr. hofsass. but what is the status within the organizations and correlating the cross border operation that we can all use and reduce your workload even more? >> sure. that's a great question and it is something we are working on. i will tell you that for this year certainly known crewmember will continue to be a domestic program with u.s. carriers. pilots and flight attendants of course will be users of that system of u.s. carriers. as you look at partnerships and talk about canada, for example, since you brought up, there is great initiatives under way across the border right now typically with the checked

baggage screening and other preclearance programs, the partnership with cdp on our side and the canadian customs with things we are doing what nexus as that comes under the global entry umbrella. we are making a fair amount of progress, good amount of progress this year on starting to look at how those programs harmonize and the similarities between the programs. we have done some preliminary conversations with in our foreign partners as we look towards 2013 about a compatible comparable levels of security for the crew and employees of the things we will be looking at is probably a process that will allow us to look and share with each other's security programs to see if there is a way to begin to talk to some of the systems together. but what i would say from the last year is things are starting to look more promising in that direction because of some of the partnerships and information sharing we've had on the passenger programs, so we'd is on the radar. it certainly won't be 2012 but i

think there is an opportunity to at least put a process to get to look at harmonizing the standards. >> thank you. >> good morning. alpa's director security for canada and also the chairman for the security committee. i would like to direct my question to ms. shaver with regards to cargo. owls you are no doubt aware, there are some brand new icao standards and recommended practices that are coming down the street. with regards to the cargo screening, i guess there's three main highlights the we are going to see first of all we are going to see a definition for what constitutes high risk cargo and we are also going to see the cargo and the male are going to be treated equally. i think most important for us is the removal of the

differentiation between cargo ship on cargo aircraft and cargo shipped on passenger aircraft. and in other words, they're basically going to have to meet the same baseline standard. my question is basically i know that many states are closer than others worldwide and to meeting these new standards and recommended practices. my question is how close is the united states system to begin to meet these new services when they come down the pike probably another 12 to 18 months or however long it's going to take icao to run through the process. and what will need to be done in order to meet these standards? thank you. >> thanks for the question. can you hear me? >> yes. >> so we are looking forward to seeing what work comes out of icao in the next few months, particularly with the meeting for september and the high-level security conference coming up to see exactly what happens with those papers and proposals that

have been developed over the past few months. we are completist with the definition primarily on the risk-based screening we believe it is an elite, those defective efficient resource to devote the same amount of screening to all cargo so being able to identify what is high risk in having a global standard for that i think is a critical first step in the efficacy of the risk-based program. for the u.s.'s particular stance on these, i afraid we are not engaged in, how would i say, intense conversations with the regulators, so that question i would unfortunately have to deflect. >> we are working on it. [laughter] >> folks, on that note i think that we are out of time, and i very much thank the audience for your interest and your questions

and i also think that we are extremely fortunate to have the participation of our subject matter experts today in the discussion in the need for an application of intelligence driven risk-based measures in aviation security. please join me in thanking bald, bug -- bob, doug, liz and carey. thank you for your interest in this topic. for those of you the interest in copies, alpa papers on risk-based securities are the alpa tables. thank you so much. it's greatly appreciated. >> thank you. very, very good material. it's now time for the morning break. you will have 30 minutes to return phone calls check your e-mail and definitely visit the exhibitors. please, be on time. we will be ready at 10:20 to

resume. thank you. >> we are bringing you live coverage of the air line pilots association safety conference sure in washington. this break will be about half an hour or so. up next speakers will address the increasing use of automation of flights and how that contributes to the erosion of manual piloting skills. again, that will start about 10:20 eastern life kuran c-span2

>> i think we have a myth that it's two guys in a dorm room that cracked the code and falls into place we end up with facebook. we don't see friendster and my

space and the twins laying on the side of the road not having achieved success. we will continue live coverage of the air line pilots association when they resume at 10:20. right now though we will go back to a discussion from yesterday about some of the health issues the pilots face. >> okay. welcome back. some people have the luxury of

being able to take a good health for granted. as airline pilots, we do not. dfa makes us undergo medical examinations on a regular basis. and while many medical issues don't have much affect on a person's ability to be productive in the workplace, for an airline pilot who's seen conditions can end their flying career. we operate under extreme environment with high altitudes, cosmic radiation and ever-changing times zones. we fly day and night and have varying sleep patterns. and don't forget stress. stress on operations, family concerns or even the economic of our particular airline. it can add up to major impact on the pilots health and well-being. we will now hear from our very distinguished group of aviation medical experts about the most pressing medical issues facing today's pilots. moderating this panel is captain

dettra. >> thanks. [applause] >> good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. i am captain chip dettra of the medical group. the medical group makes up one of the five components of alpa's pilot assistance structure. in the arab medical group, we take a multifaceted approach to helping members maintain good health with information and individual interactions. our group works with the medical industry and federal regulators to ensure the latest information and standards not only to get to the pilots but they've received the information is also applied to the medical certificates. now on to our panel. 93 honored to have such distinguished guests today.

dr. snyder is alpa's faeroe medical adviser and the faa's federal air surgeon. following the presentation there will be ample time for questions and i encourage you to engage dr. speed -- dr. tilton and dr. snyder. dr. snyder is the president and ceo of the aviation medical but pfizer resurface we often refer to it has amas. the medical ongoing relationship the start in the late 60's. every airline pilot must pass a regular medical examination to determine his general health and fitness for duty. amas assistance is in dalia will not only in pilots maintain their medical certificate, but helping pilots regain their medical certificates with the

least amount of hassle and in a reasonable amount of time if it were ever to be denied. they also provide pro-active information and assistance to ensure pilots maintain the best possible health throughout their airline career. dr. snyder, i would like to talk about the scope of your operations over there and how amas supports alpa. >> thank you very much, chip. it's a pleasure to be here. the alpa aeromedical office was formed in denver in 1969, and since that time, we have been providing services for alpa, its members and its leadership. we've also been interacting with the faa and with international organizations, the military and the ntsb with pilot health and safety. we have two primary functions that we work with.

one is the consultation which is advice to the union leadership on issues such as you will find out in the white papers that have been distributed in the back room. please pick one up and look at that as the cover some very important issues. the other part of the service is to the individual pilots. we assist them with maintaining their health, providing them advice about how to best do that while simultaneously helping them maintain their medical certification and to be compliant with the faa rules for reporting the medical conditions we work closely with the pilot assistance committee, which captain dettra delude two has five components. aeromedical but we also work with hims, which captain moak spoke about earlier today, a program where pilots with the disease of addiction or abuse

are successfully treated and returned to the cockpit in a very successful program. we worked closely with the professional standards and critical incident response. teams from alpa with pilots who may have problems in different areas, and many times we find overlap from all those areas. the canadians also work closely with us. although they have some autonomy and different regulations that apply to them, the common theme of health and safety is universal for all pilots. we also spend a considerable amount of time interacting with the alpa's engineering and safety department to take a look at areas where the pilot health might be improved through broader areas with suggested changes and technology and regulations. our other interactions include the legal department and retirement insurance to make

sure pilots are encouraged to get the appropriate medical care and have the ability to do so. a big part of our efforts are also working jointly with the communications department and speech called. we write monthly articles and health watch to inform pilots about evolving technologies, current medical conditions, and how best to care for themselves. .. >> involve cooperation and coordination with international

pilot unions and the certification authorities such as the asian that countries. we do have a relationship with the icao medical office and dr. tony evans there, and our hims outreach also includes educating our international brothers and sisters regarding programs to better treat the drug and alcohol problems. most recently, we've been in new zealand, hong kong and brazil to assist them in setting up programs. perhaps the most satisfying portion of what we do is collaborating with the federal air surgeons' office in a host of areas. dr. tilton's been very gracious in working with alpa as you've seen all day with the theme of cooperation between industry and regulators. we also work very closely with the air medical certification division in oklahoma city primarily on behalf of individual pilots, but also to initiate and effect policy changes.

some of the areas that alpa has been pushing for changes in policy that have been great successes are, number one, the hims program with over 4,000 pilots who have been successfully returned to the cockpit. back in the '70s, coronary artery disease was a disqualifying condition, and what that did was drove can pilots underground to not report conditions or dangerous to their health, not seek evaluations and treatment. but with the evolution or policy changes in that area, now pilots routinely are returned to fly after being successfully treated with these diseases. other examples would be the hiv-positive pilots n. interest of the transfer in travel that we do, dr. tilton's office has worked very closel and announced policies that allow pilots to use fleet medicines to better prepare our pilots and make them safer when they are faced with these transmeridian flights and are facing the jet

lag. a very, very important change in april of 2010 was a policy allowing pilots with the disease of depression to fly on certain medications with aggressive monitoring and testing prior to doing so. when the sars epidemic broke out and we had h1n1, there were questions about whether pilots could reduce their risk of disease particularly if they had symptoms, the office was instrumental in announcing policies that allowed our pilots to fly with the protection of medications, and that was done in a matter of several days. flight time/duty time has been an ongoing discussion, and i think we're making significant progress. the medical aspect looks primarily not only at the

science that has been so well defined, but also ways that we might augment that. and we also provide education to the pilots about other areas that might help such as the use of nutritional supplements in lieu of medications and also discouraging the use of alcohol and over the counter antihistamines which many pilots have use inside the past. some of the current issues we have are the evolving technology and products in medicine. there's a continuous evolution of medications that are coming out, but also now we're looking at pacemakers that have interesting capabilities now, automatic internal defibrillators, perhaps the artificial pan crease for individuals afflicted with diabetes requiring insulin. on october 1st the faa is implementing universal web-based medical applications for pilots. we've been able to work jointly to understand some potential

problems that both pilots and air traffic controllers might face. with the ultra long-range flights, again, we've worked with issues and the medications. the laser hazard exposures, the division of research department was instrumental in providing us information that allowed us to educate the public at the laser hazard conference that alpa hosted last year. we're continually interested in streamlining the certification process for our pilots so that there is less reluctance to get treatment and report conditions to the faa and know that once they are medically sound, they can also be certified. and in the very, very near future, i think we will be wrestling with commercial space flight medical standards not only for the crews, but possibly for the passengers as well. i earlier mentioned the alpa white papers, i would encourage

you to pick up a copy in the back near our sponsors. one of importance is enhancing pilots' occupational safety and health protections which encourages an air ration health and safety -- air vegas health and safety partnership program with the faa, with industry, with osha and with pilot groups. there is also another white paper on unmanned aircraft systems. the medical certification of the operators of those systems will be a key issue for discussion in the very near future. we're very, very fortunate to have dr. fred tilton, the federal air surgeon, speaking with us today. after graduating from the air force academy -- i'm sorry, from west point. i'm an air force guy, so -- [laughter] he did come to the bright side and join the air force. [laughter] and had 4,000 hours as a command pilot and a senior flight

surgeon in a host of aircraft including the b-47, c-141, trainers, t-37, t-38, transport aircraft with the c-12 and in his last assignment in the f-5. f-15. he's a graduate of the university of new mexico and has his master's of public health from the university of texas. after retiring from the air force, he had a career as regional medical director for boeing aircraft corporation, then became their corporate flight department. he took his initial position with the faa in 2000 as the deputy federal air surgeon, and since 2006 he's been the federal air surgeon, and currently he flies the citation xl for the faa. dr. tilton is a friend, a colleague, and he is a pilot's doctor who a doctor's pilot. he understands aviation, he's an advocate for the pilot, and it's a great privilege to have him speaking with us today. >> thank you.

[applause] >> hello, everyone. i usually tell everyone when i get an introduction like that, it just proves i'm really old. so you're fortunate you have dr. snyder working with you with. we spend a significant amount of time discussing policy, and then we look at a individual cases so that he represents you and your constituents and makes sure that if we're having problems with certifying individuals, that they get the best shot. and so he does an outstanding job for you, and you're fortunate. i'm only going to take a couple minutes to give remarks because i want to give you most of your time to ask questions. but the first thing i want to talk about is a certification policy that we have at the faa. as you heard, i was a pilot before i was a doctor, and i used to tremble a lot when i used to go see my flight surgeon

thinking that the best thing i could do was break even. so if i could get in and out of there and he didn't do anything to me, that was a good thing. so i felt that way until i was flying b-57s when i flew in a special squadron, and our flight surgeons were assigned directly to the squadron, and they flew with us. they went tdy with us, they went to the club with us, they did everything. and i learned that the best flight surgeons are the people who integrate with the pilots, work close will hi with them, party with them, socialize with them and realize that flying is extremely important. and i always tell people that a flight surgeon can make a big mistake if he unnecessarily disqualifies somebody which we hate to do. so that leads to our certification policy which is, as you well know, i work in avs, aviation safety and the faa. i work for peggy gill yang who spoke to you earlier today, and the primary reason we're there

is for safety of the air space. so i tell everyone i work is, the reason we're here is to make sure the air space is safe. i go to seminars and talk about the primary reason they're there is to do the same thing. and, in fact, you probably see your ane probably more than you see any faa person. and so the ame has a great opportunity to talk to you about your history and to make sure that you are safe and to learn new things that we're finding out in aerospace medicine. but if you take for granted that the primary reason we're there is for aviation safety, the second reason we're there is to make sure that everyone we can get in the air we do. and if you look at the history of the faa over the years, 40 years ago if you had hypertension being treated like i do and you had a lot of other things, you were disqualified not just for a month or a year, but forever. so we have gone a long way. and if you look at the list of things we certify now, 40 years ago they would never have considered doing that, and we do that based on evidence-based

medicine. if we can find someone that can be safely certified even though they may not meet the standards, our primary mission is to get them in the air safely. and our data show that. we denied less than 400 people finally last year, and the data are a little bit skewed because those are the people that pursued it all the way to the end. but we deny very, very few people, because our primary philosophy is certify everyone we can and get them in the air. the second thing i want to talk about is the pilots' bill of rights. you may or may not be aware of it because it was just passed recently, and i'm not really sure, nor is the rest of the faa exactly sure how that's going to impact us. we're going to have a requirement to notify pilots that they're having an investigation which is, according to the law, an investigation. it also means that they have a right now. they used to be able to appeal beyond me to the national transportation safety board. now they can appeal to the u.s.

district court which means they can get a jury trial. all of these things, and there are several aspects of the pilots' bill of rights that we're not clear exactly how they're going to effect us, but they will effect us. they will effect you, so you're learn more about that from flight standards and from us as well and probably from your legal advisers at alpa. so be aware that there's more coming in that regard. and with those comments i'd be happy to sit down and answer questions or stand up and answer questions. thanks a lot. [applause] >> dr. tilton, we really appreciate you coming today. my question has to deal with attendance and liability policies. i was at --

[inaudible] before i left a few months ago, and in 2008 they implemented this policy where a pilot who calls in sick because -- could be disciplined if he does it a few number of times throughout the calendar year. then we had our accident in 2009, and the company suspended the policy. a couple months ago before i left they continued once again to implement is attendance and reliability policy which is in direct conflict to our medical standards, it's a policy that really conflicts with the faa guidance. and i know my former airline isn't the only one that has this policy. what are your thoughts on that, and is the faa looking into these individual airlines that do have these attendance and reliability policies? >> well, first of all, if you have issues like that, medical probably is not the correct organization. it would be flight standards that would be looking at the management of an airline. i certainly do not think that it

is a good idea for people not to be able to tell their airline they're sick. at the outset, my primary reason for being here is aviation safety. and if someone is tell telling you they're sick and you have to fly an airplane, it's counter to the philosophy for many reasons. i would not support such a policy, but, in fact, in effect, we don't make policy for the airlines, they do that. and so if you feel there's a conflict with your airline that they're causing a safety issue, you should report it probably to flight standards and not medical, although they might talk to us about the consequences. >> i appreciate that, thank you. >> referring to the illustrious captain -- good afternoon. dr. tilton, bill degrow, operations group chair. i had, actually, a couple questions. from your perspective we have

some emerging technologies coming our way. uas is one that was brought up on the slide. and i wonder if you could elaborate a little bit on thoughts of air medical issues that might be unique to uas. that's one. and then the same kind of question with all la -- ultra long-haul operations. i've had a couple bouts with kidney stones, and i don't know if there's an airline pilot out there that hasn't had a kidney stone. i didn't know if there was any more information along that. i know my ame has joked off about wanting to start a research project on why that's such an issue with pilots. but just those two questions out air medical challenges faced by, perhaps, usa and ultra long operations. >> well, i'll start off, first of all, by saying i hope there's at least one airline pilot out there that hasn't had a kidney stone. [laughter] but, and i don't know if there really is an increased incident

of kidney stones in pilots, but i do know that one of the reasons people have kidney stones is because they get dehydrated. and sitting in an airliner at 7% humidity for ultra long flights as you talked about, sometimes 18 hours, even longer, if people aren't hydrating themselves, there's a possibility they get dehydrated, and if they have a potential already to have a kidney stone, that might exacerbate the problem. so i don't think anybody's really done a study that says pilots have increased incidents of kidney stone, but certainly it's significant. those of you that have had it, it's not something you want to have in the an airplane. -- in an airplane. they're extremely painful, and, certainly, we have lots of people that have waivers with kidney stones, but we're concerned you might have one in flight that might pass and create problems. now i'll get back to your first question which is what do i

think about the air medical situation with respect to uas. we are looking to develop standards with people that operate uas. the problem is there are so many different kinds of those airplanes that are flying. some of those are the size of a bumblebee and some the size of a 737 or bigger, and how do you deal with those individuals that operate those? some are actually doing them by line of sight where they're watching these, and they have an observer that watches them. they may be inspecting a building. some of them are flying on computer programs, and so we have all kinds of issues associated with vision, associated with hearing, associated with cognitive functions of programming, and as you're well aware, some of them are flying completely programmed, and they program and take off and land, and you don't do anything else. some of them are flying like model airplanes, actually visual control, and there are other ways that you can control these airplanes. so we are going to look at, and the faa is actively trying to figure out how we will develop medical standards, and we're

working on rules to do that. right now we have no authority to regulate those with respect to medical conditions. but i think eventually, and i don't think eventually means a long time, but it's going to take us months or maybe a year or two to figure out how we develop a standard that covers this whole gamut of uas from very small things to very huge things. how do we deal with them in the air space? how does air traffic control do it with the way we used to manage airplanes? there's no one in a global hawk to see outside. so it's an issue for us in medicine, it's an issue for air traffic control, it's an issue for you as pilots. very complicated, so i expect that you'll see in the coming months some standards associated with those people that operate them. but how we'll end up completely and finally at the end of the day, i'm not completely sure. >> thank you very much.

>> oh, boy, i'm the last guy standing, i get to ask the big question. first of all, i'd like to say as a recipient of a special issuance medical, thank you very much. that was a wonderful thing, to get that medical back. um, and i'd like o congratulate you folks for the speed at which the process moved. i was quite surprised. pleasantly surprised. my question has more to do with as we in the aircraft design operations group look forward, we hear manufacturers talking about constructing single--pilot transport category airplanes and things like this. and i just wondered what you look at in medical standards as you would consider that type of development. this is much, way down the road type of a project, but as we look at the looming, potential

looming pilot short shortage, there's two things i see coming. one is single-pilot transport airplanes and the other is perhaps pilots flying well past age 65. >> okay. single pilot is an interesting issue, and actually pilots of the united states have less of an issue than they do in the united kingdom and in europe and even in canada. and the reason i say that is we do not certify individuals that we feel may have some kind of medical problem that will create a problem, a safety problem in the air. the europeans and the canadians, and i'm not sure about the rest of the countries in the world, have programs where they will certify one that says only for participation in a multipilot cockpit with a fully qualified co-pilot. we don't do that. so we certify people so that we believe that they're just as safe to fly an airplane as someone who might not have a special issuance or a waive. so as a result of that from the

medical perspective, i don't think that having a single-pilot transport airplane is as big an issue as i do think maybe from the flying public who wonders about one pilot up there and what happens if that person has some kind of medical problem. and as you're aware, when we frequently see pilots that get incapacitated not because they have a condition that's disqualifying, they may have a gastrointestinal problem or something that effects them temporarily where two days from now they're ready to go fit and fiddle. yet if they'd been alone in the airplane, what would that have accomplished, and how would that affect the safety of the air space? i've actually heard of some manufacturers that were developing single-cockpit airplanes and decided that the public wasn't ready for -- >> remarks from a session yesterday from this conference. we'll leave it at this point and remind you that you can see all of this online in the c sparks are -- c-span video library.

c-span.org. heading back live now to the safety conference, up next a look at the increasing use of automation of flight and how that contributes to the erosion of manual piloting skills from the airline pilot association safety conference here in washington. [inaudible conversations] >> okay, welcome back. checking your programs, you'll see our next topic deals with aviation automation and technology. we here at alpa have examined the subject of integrating technology into our cockpits and aircraft, automation in today's high performance aircraft for the past several years because it's always relevant when discussing the needs for efficient flight operations, workload management or situational awareness. but where do we draw the line between utilizing systems to gain safety and operational improvements and potential overreliance? on technology and automation?

how do we train our pilots to make efficient use of automation and yet maintain the ability to maintain necessary manual flying skills? our next panel will talk about some of the new technology that manufacturers are integrating into our new aircraft, and we'll examine how these advances impact the average pilot. moderating this panel is captain dave mckenney who is alpa's director of pilot training programs. he will introduce this distinguished panel. dave? >> thanks. and thank you, captain hogeman, for the opportunity to moderate this panel. the commercial system as we know is the safest transportation system in the world, and the accident rate is the lowest it has ever been. this impressive record is due to many factors, including the aircraft design, aircraft reliability, the automated

systems, the pilots, the pilot training, the air traffic control procedures and numerous safety enhancements over the years. the role of pilot has changed over the years and will continue to evolve as next general is implemented. pilot are required now to be systems mores in this -- managers in this complex air traffic system that we have while still maintaining their airmen skills that we've had to have from the beginning. and pilots also mitigate operational risk in all areas in which they are involved. in fact, our aviation system relies on this mitigation. we complete thousands of flights daily effectively, efficiently and get our passengers safely where they need to be based on a contribution of our professional pilots and everybody else in this complex system. in the future, automation's going to continue to play a role as we involve towards nextgen. to enable this new system to

function with increased utilization and control, automation's evolving and our pilot tasks, as i mentioned, are going to change. this will place new demands on a system that is already under pressure. this new automation components are themselves a potential new source of air and risk. this is especially true at the automated system implementation and design does not use human factors principles during the design phase. while the ultimate responsibility of flying the airplane remains with the pilots, we have learned that crews are not adequately trained to handle these automated systems, especially in high-demand situations. ..

automation cannot handle the complexities of the next generation air transportation system without nm terkel component still maintain our current level of safety. advances in technology and automated systems must be viewed in the context of the approach i mentioned earlier were the humanness of the center of that system. the most effective automation design places appropriate emphasis on human capabilities as well as their limitations. automation needs to allow the pilots the chance to handle short-term and short notice

changes necessary to accommodate the factors that underlined such as when the weather changes, air-traffic control or just a greater performance or partial system failures. we still must be able to take control of the aircraft and land safely on the ground. the automated systems must be clear to the message and information they provide to the pilots. the pervvijze to the status of the aircraft all times and people to predict what the system is doing so they can anticipate changes that need to be made. today's panel of experts will discuss the development of increased use of automation in today's airplanes and we are going to look at the last 25 years including some of the lessons learned. they will discuss with the automation is today and how it will affect us in nextgen. i'm going to have to with our

manufacturers will provide their perspective on how the automatic systems have designed with the evin vision for the future. falling them will be dr. woods will discuss the complexity and new techniques to monitor this aviation system and the look of the overall system resilience. our session will conclude with the pilot perspective from dr. reidemar on the policies of automation. i would like to introduce the panel right now. speaking first be captain mike carriker come to my left to is the chief pilot for air plan development for boeing. next to him as captain terry lutz and former alpa member. dr. woods is the professor of the ohio state university and at the end, is dr. reidemar director of human factors for

alpa the last time i started at the alpa convention was in 2002. it's fascinating to think of the differences between the concept of the presentations of that day and the presentations we listened to for the past couple of days. i don't think anybody in 2000 to worry about cargo security at a convention. it's interesting times. as dave said, where are we going? sometimes you have to know where you are going because where have you been? it's an interesting concept with so many players involved in all these conversations. terry and i were just discussing that capabilities for their plan is not the capability but the infrastructure that holds it is may be the limiting factor. how many flu in 1970?

if you are still flying today. what were the most often questions asked in 1970 and the flight deck. what's the outbound? how many of you folks are still flying the airplane is today? the year plan my flight tomorrow is not capable airplane so i have to follow all these points. what is the embrum? the other question. what's that for us? what airplane are we flying today? at boeing we fly about five calls lines and if i don't hear the word going and flying somebody else's air planet doesn't compete in my head. can i get a cup of coffee? for the questions most often 2,012th how do you spell that fix? [laughter] we took the airplane, the 787 to

the airshow and clear for this fix and that fixed and finally we just asked the british comptroller can you spell that for me because i can't do that. was that for us so we must not have made much improvement. did the flight intendant of here so i can use the laughs. nobody ever thought we would have to call another person to sit in the flight deck to use the laboratory and secure the laboratory and can i get a cup of coffee. so why did these questions change? what in the history of aviation and the last 25 years what stood the test of time, what haven't we changed, what haven't we had it has lots of things. why did we add it? that's always a question of why did we add it. is that a precursor, a flight data recorder and? did we subtract anything? i think we subjected something in basic pilot skills.

this saturday i should go for maybe 25 type rating and an airplane it takes five figures to start the engines. but we don't want anybody to have to watch the color of the plan to adjust the mixture anywhere. it's not a good idea. jerry interesting question. can we track efficiencies versus complexities? we can always make things more complex but we do not get any more efficient. are we better? when he was president of the boeing company had a meeting with us. there were 20 people that made this 787 program. we're sitting around this meeting in his office and he said your mission, to the team, is to make a safe and efficient global air transportation system to be a key participant in a safe and efficient global air transportation system. our collective mission for the designers of controllers to the security people and maintenance

people but it operates the airplane has never changed. it is absolutely unequivocal about safety. if we ever lose the theory that we don't have a safe flight, we are all out of business. no one will get on our jet a matter how wonderful the service is, and as dave said very eloquent better than i can say, we are very good at it. i ran through the statistics of the protection in 1990 and we are better in the requirements of the safety event analysis of 1990 as the chorus goes up so we are actually better than what we hope to do. but we have to keep growing better because the future is out there. when dave asked me to you want to talk about this this was the first set of impressions that i had. you want to talk with the future of aviation and technology and what are going to do, and i drew a big blank. but i kept thinking airplane changes in the last 40 years.

anybody that got 727 mabey if you're still around anymore. the 737 autopilot headed out. the flight director wasn't coupled to the autopilot. no auto throttle system, distributed warning systems in the overhead panel, manual systems control and then you could draw the system on a chalkboard. the 78 aaa 300 although flight guidance you hit on the 787 from hitting the button on the takeoff to coming to stop we will provide you left right to guidance and once your airborne we will provide left guidance and indication of the path and we will provide a warning of excessive mediation. from the atoka push until the end of the rollout the flight

directors integrated in the flight system. the throttle fomc tunes the navigation system if it has to gps gives accuracies unbelievable 15 years ago. the gyros in the system used now differential to sweeten the answer. although start on the engines. although start on the engines are there to protect the engine not to ease the pilot workload. technically in the 787 if both engines failed it's not in the procedure in the 787 both engines failed you sit there because the autopilot stays engaged and the engine is going although or dreaming your flight

training. it's the concept and that is the fact that we are -- the whole thing is a system that people and the pilot and the public and the air plan makes a system. why did we change? why do we change? safety. cost to operate, cost to build going to nextgen. echostar wanted there's probably four more in there and the last 1i have to deal with all the time the pilot thing is really cool. so all those people got on their ipad holder installed, skip it. [laughter] we have infrastructure. we have 5,000 of the 77 in service, $30,000 estimated cost for training to do some public mouth, 2.25 billions of capital invested in to the flight crews around the world.

at boeing the airline service is going to require 460,000 more pilots in the next 20 years. as far as i can figure out, that exceeds the capacity of the training system today. so unless you know of a killer application, the competitive rate for us right now is to get 787 out the door, triple seven out the door and the 737 max out the door and into our customers' hands. thanks. there is one other thing. this is the most game changing piece of equipment in the flight deck. the applications written for this and the ability to get what we call 121 integration published on this is going to radically change the way we get information in and out of the flight deck and will make -- if you put a good receiver on an airplane, it really will bring all airplanes in world wide

service as being a note on the net and that will be one of the fundamental changes we have to deal with in the flight deck. thanks. [applause] >> thank you, mike, for that wonderful perspective. we agree the information management that we are all dealing with today is almost an overload of information in the flight deck and we are going to have to figure out how to use that and what to use and what not to use. so, next with like to introduce jerry had let him give the perspective on automation. thank you. >> good morning everyone. it's a pleasure for me to be here. it's a pleasure for me to be able to give back something to this industry that helped me so much in my career and helped elevate me to the place where i am now airbus as an experimental test pilots. what i can talk about a little

bit today is integrating technology with piloting to get a slightly different perspective than mike presented but you will see some similarities along the way as well. if you look at airline operations in 1965, it was the end of the reciprocating era. there was still d.c. 67 airplanes in the service as well as the super consolation. the 707, 727 and the dc-8 or the first engine aircraft in service. 737 and the d.c. 97 to follow and later the 747 in 1970. at that time there were no computers, satellites, no ins and navigation was flown with media. few precision approaches and for long-range operations poor communications coverage and poor weather information on a global basis. the role of the pilots in 1965

devotee and communicate with the help of a flight engineer to manage the systems. it was essentially an extensive manual skill set and the mental skill set required was focused mainly on the instrument flying. required of the pilot a solid knowledge of the atmosphere and weather, basic aerodynamics and capabilities. when i say capability, what i am discussing is on a given runway can i get off this runaway from the standpoint and accelerate the stop standpoint. and if you put that in the landing case, can on land on that runway given the weather conditions, the runway conditions, the runway where i want to turn off, etc.. so those basic required skill sets, the knowledge of the atmosphere, basic air and amex and airfield capabilities are with the pilot needed to know in 1965. let's have a look today to see

what skills are required. airline operations in 2012. the 23 and the 727 have been in service now for almost 20 years to rid almost all the airplanes flying today have glasscock pits with lcd displays and routine over water operations conducted with twin-engine airplanes. we are beginning to see in the introduction of the 787 and the 8350 primary elements are being made of carbon fiber to save weight and increase performance. computers, lots of computers. we have gps for augmentation, triple irs, fm gec to integrate everything so you can have extremely accurate navigation with augmented gps we can fly approaches to almost any airport long enough to the minimums. for communications, one of the things that was lacking in those

early days you couldn't communicate on a long-range basis, but now hs has a data modem and centcom has a data mode, so with cpdlc of long-range communications and other products produced by satellites, the airplanes themselves can report the weather conditions that to the ground stations, so you have excellent global weather capability today. the pilot's role, how does it change? it used to be 88, navigate, communicate. but navigation and communication rules are now largely automated. but the pilot still has to do the basic a feeding task and the new task has been required of the pilot and that is to manage the overall mission. systems today have been largely automated and those of you that have rent on the 727 no and you have a manual pressurization system you are freezing for modern airplanes have a system

to manage mission means the public not only has to consider everything going on with his particular flight in terms of once you are airborne let the airplane to the navigation's and the communications, but what you want to do is manage that flight to get it to the exact position that you want, either in space on the approach, for example, were on the runway at a specific time for your companies of their plan can get to the gate, turnaround and a load of passengers and be on to its new destination. if you look at the flying task in 2012, you realize that there is still a manual skill set required. but there is now a new skill set which is extensively mental that's also required. but what remains unchanged the atmosphere in the weather hasn't changed, basic aerodynamics and the airfield capabilities in terms of what you can do with that airplane on that runway has

not changed. i want to give you two examples about how technology has interfaced and has changed the interface. those examples are what is happening with flight controls and what's happening with engine controls. if you look at the 727 of the pilot control which is probably the best manual autopilot control i've ever flown there were to maxis and one controller. it fits your hand very nicely and was located behind so you had to move your hand over and use the autopilot to control the airplane. it has forced displacement and read capability. what he had is a page altitude hold and the role great command and a bank and gold. if you go on their plan with the be the site to control what we use an hour airplane or the manual controller and 77 you also have the two vaccines and one controller, excellent h. am i for the forced displacement and treat people become and you

find it is basically a letter to hold and the bank angle hold so you can to the controllers in the modern airplanes as either super altoprev that controllers, or you can view them as pilot controllers where the airplane itself is compensating for all of the undesirable motions for the dutch role for the short period of motion and if you control the spiral which will allow you to fly a very precise bank ankle. what about the engine controls we have in today's airplanes? this is a picture of the hydra mechanical engine control. actually had difficulty finding one on the internet. this is from a garate three tepee triple propeller engine. it's a highly optimized mechanical control but it's very complex for the high parts count, difficult to maintain, expensive to overhaul, has a very long mechanical mechanism from the cockpit out to the

engine to me and even when it's rigged to the best of the mechanics of the least there is a thrust letter split that you had to contemplate when you were flying the airplane. one last thing that isn't on the slide with the mechanical kunkel you probably didn't have over temperature protection for the engine itself. let's look at today's. you have excellent engine control without exceeding the limits. we have optimized controller that will extend the engine life which is near and dear to the pilot to make sure that they are going to run and run for very long time. as an internal power capability within the engine itself for a small of a meter that will just in case the mengin loses total electrical power from its generators course of the year plan itself. i think what is the key is that there is no longer any direct mechanical linkage so you can have perfectly matched thrust levers and you might call it a

thrust buy why your system. so when you think about these technology changes and how they have affected the pilot, you may not have ever thought about it that way but as technology changes the pilot's role in how he interfaces with the airplane is the traditional knowledge base of the privilege of being overlooked. what about the weather, what about basic aerodynamics and the runway environment? are we overlooking all of that knowledge the pilot needs in the process of improving technology and the pilot's role. is the training environment adapting to technology integration and focusing on the extensive mental skill set a pilot needs in today's airline operation. finally as a flout program are mandatory training requirements outdated considering the technology improvements and the changing nature? we can have an airplane today you can take off at maximum gross weight, have an engine

failure and continue to rotate and takeoff and their plan will maintain its setting and allow you to climb and operate your normal procedures after that. it's not the same as the airplanes we flew in 1965. this training need to adapt to those new technology improvements. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, terry for a wonderful perspectives. we sere kirker changing the pilot's role are changing, the way we do training is changing and it puts a lot of pressure on the system as i mentioned earlier that's already under pressure and we have a lot of pilots that are going to be entering the workforce as mike said in the next 20 to 30 years. sestak of the resilience of our aviation system. i'd like to now introduce dr. david woods.

>> you just heard, reflect on what they just talked about for a second. it's very complex would you do. it's extremely complex what you manage. you have to do it under fast paced conditions. seven things can happen, unexpected and mom routine even soccer. this is the sea of complexity that you operate in, and you are despite all the other good things they talked about, you end up being a critical ingredient in making this complexity work every day. and other people in a wide variety of roles, alpa, the vendors, the flight safety groups, all of these people in these different roles in a total aviation system keep adopting and learning to make it work. but as our great american philosopher yogi berra said even if the world were perfect, it wouldn't be.

how do we perform better when we are under constant pressure to be faster and cheaper and improve each individual part of the total system? the sea of complexities are not just yours in fact in many ways you are leading and teaching others about how to navigate. we see these in operating rooms, we see this in space operations. we've seen this a military command and control. now the opportunity here is advances in science. the complexity science study soudet systems work. how people in various roles learn recognize and anticipate. in our world we talk about it as proactive safety. but there are new findings come a new concept, new laws about how they end up in the face of

complexity. now, intellectually this is very not intuitive. you are used to simplification to make things work. to focus on one piece at a time. the focus on one issue at a time than they try to make the interactions work. from the complexity point of view the system is all in the interactions and what emerges. it's all about more and more extensive interdependency. notice how the automation creates a layer of apparent simplicity over those increasing interdependent relationships between more and more parts so that everything looks simple and runs super scriven dewitt doesn't just like yogi berra reminded us and then we see cascades' you have to try to keep up with. we see tipping points and surprises. we have to integrate across multiple perspectives and we have to not simply find a good operating but we have to be a will to deliver as

organizations, as learning organizations in the same way that you have to control the capability for maneuvering the aircraft. in the face of this critical concept is when systems have failed, they reveal plans of brittleness and resilience. people are often the hidden source of resilience in one or another roll. sometimes we restrict the ability of people to act as a source of resilience and we need to make up for that and other places. the question is can resiliency engineer in the organizations that carry out complex activities. can we measure and monitor for increasing brittleness and tax debate to ask proactively especially as we are making changes to be faster, better, cheaper. well, for me, resilience started with history. we have a great landing on mars. but you may remember in 1999 we had three failures.

and nasa started a program from the two dozen mine accident report with increasingly brittle systems under faster, better, cheaper pressure. a variety of things happened and then we had a repeat in the columbia accident where i was able to be an adviser to the investigation board. this is a slightly edited for visibility slide from 2,000. i want you to think about and remember what we just covered and how it applies to you today. nasa exists in a changing environment with resource pressures, driving down costs, shorter more aggressive schedules, new partners and relationships, new rules, skilling erosion, heightened public interest. the question they pose is what could be the new dimension that could be used in management as important as cost and schedule and the proposal i made in 2007 and the aftermath columbia accident here in d.c. to nasa

and the converse is resilience and we have started this development of engineering. interdependency its complexity. we just got a hint of it in the demonstrations they gave. i normally run through some examples of the center dependencies and how they produce unintended consequences. this is counterinsurgency diagram that cannot a year or two ago to read a great spaghetti map all of the interdependency they have to work through in terms of managing these kind operations overseas. succumb operating in the complexity while intellectually and on into this you experience how to do it every day. as a key adapted element, a source of resilience in the aviation system you have to deal with it in dynamic and dependencies. you have to handle challenges on the martini and unexpected conditions our eyes. you have to be able to keep up with a cascade of events when a sensor failure cascades and you don't know what to trust in

terms of the cockpit indications. what we are trying to do is understand and measure how the systems are brittle and how we can bring the extra adoptive capacity to bear. the concept is actually from you that we are using it to teach other people about how to do this and we can take a concrete example of you and flight control systems and say in order to maintain come to be in control for the future for the next event that might occur you have to maintain a margin of maneuver that you can add to compensate for those not expect a routine events. what we see over time is cumulative inadvertent complexity. unintended consequences are increasingly brittle systems so that our failures are not due to a component or even several components as is typical in how we try to learn from incidents trying to improve individual pieces of the system.

as a complex set up a system we have to see it's in the interaction and therefore how the incident or action tells us about brittleness and sources of resilience otherwise we will continue to see a surprising failures in trying to react and keep up when our intent is to be proactive. there are regularities about how complex of systems failed. we don't have time to run through them right now but you are prepared to deal with these most of the time because of your skills as effective pilots. when we think about resilience the best thing is to think of images you encounter whether it is a uav accident, friendly fire incident with a patriot missile or humorous cases where the introduction of gps has led to new signs warning people not to follow their satellite navigation because large trucks

tend to not be able to go through small lanes and english villages. we just finished this week and i believe it is being released if not today in the next couple of days a report on autonomy as part of the defense science board. in this report, we run through many of the different issues and how to deal with resilience and brittleness and it's a major shortfall that undermines the potential benefits of more autonomous automation in the system as the inability to take a true system perspective we focus too much on individual platform capability, subsystem capability and we need to do is look at it as an integrated system of people and computers managing the potentially escalating and cascading situations. what is also interesting in the report is how we point out that you don't have to be pessimistic in the face of complexity. there are ways we can anticipate

just like you anticipate problems and prepare for them you do that in terms of alternate destinations, understanding fuel margins, understanding small changes that require your vigilance in the same way that as a larger system we can anticipate bottlenecks ahead. we can look for unintended consequences, complexity science and resilience engineering are building new ways to do this including what new measures to assess how brittle the system is as a part of introducing new technology. so what is the simple summary of the complexity of that system resilience approach? you've got a good because you have adopted. people in a variety of roles haven't hesitated and learned sometimes through bitter experience the difference is when you look at those cases or

analyze new cases we need to start seeing them as stories that reveal brittleness and hidden sources of resilience when we comment on the pilots we are addressing it one of the traditional source of resilience when we have new ways a single failure propagates and has multiple systems because of the injured dependency created by multiple automated subsystems we are increasing the challenges, increasing the potential for cascades come increasing the difficulty of responding effectively under time pressure. when we look at despite the success not just a slight but because we are so successful in balancing efficiency and safety, we actually -- again the yogi berra captors it for us as we get better the fundamental system tradeoff that was on that flight from the defense science board report indicates we introduce new points of

brittleness, new complexity people have to deal with the president is more precarious than we think and more common finding from all approaches to safety from an organizational perspective and six organizations are constantly on edge recognizing that past success is no guarantee of ultrahigh safety performance. how do we create a brazillian future requires new partnership integrating multiple perspectives a different levels nationalized across the industry. it deals with future cases with this nextgen, introducing the remotely piloted vehicles in the domestic air space, there is dealing with new ways to improve the cockpit information and trading in brazillian future is going to require new working relationships and partnerships. we have new techniques and measures that are rapidly emerging and we are looking for new partners in terms of testing

and developing the practical that's why we called it resilience engineering that we can translate the science into practical things organizations can use. and the fundamental thing we point to is we take the example that you need to maintain a margin of maneuver in terms of control systems whether automated, human or a combination, and that concept generalizes and actually fits into some of the theoretical development's the we can build the control systems building on the history of success in other kind of control engineering domains so we are working with idaho national around to actually develop the basic technical findings in order to create new kind of results and control systems which ironically will be both highly computational, highly computerized and highly human and the systems. can we skip complexity? can we seascape by simply reducing and simplifying?

no but we cannot maneuver complexity. that is the necessary future to maintain the success we have had in the past. thank you. [applause] >> so as you can see, the complex systems the we deal with today, and we could only anticipate what's going to becoming in the future if we maintain the status quo we are not win to be able to maintain the same record that we have today. the pilot is only one component of the system that we've been talking about and as you can see with the complexity of times we deal with in this room is the complexity -- the pilots, the training and how we react to the surprise when something fails to a lot of our job was nothing happens during the flight so we have to figure out how we change

this and become the systems managers and work with other people? basically what we have heard already i would like to have dr. reidemar, and tell how we develop these philosophy procedures that the pilots' deal with an hour every de flights. >> before i jump right and i want to actually make mention of the fact that 14 years ago i was a first officer for the captain over here on the dc-9 and was a five day trip in that one trip i learned more about performance engineering and i think i have since come so thank you and it's great to have you here. i'm going to take a little bit of a step back from the specifics of what we are talking

about and maybe look at the process part of developing automation policies, automation design the flight path management to get so a little bit of a high-altitude perspective. we are standing at the threshold of nextgen, and it's important not to jump right in and dream up new inventors methodologies for the policy without reflecting on where we come from from an operational and philosophical perspective. we need to look at the evolution of our industry and how this should shape our trajectory going forward. the group as an industry to the problem solvers and say this is the best way to operate this

piece of equipment and we take a step back and consider the overall organizational philosophy of as well as the science and new emerging flight path management policy has to be part of an elegant hold for presidency standardization, currency in the broad sense and it all starts with well articulated company philosophy. initially developed by the earliest business plan by the founders and it includes a drawing from the essentials culture over the company to the conceptual engine that pulls the organization for word and this is not the way you find a division and the detection for how the companies to be operated ha. policies by cutting into the context is the bush as the organization policy of prayer rising the mission of the

airline industry airline has a different mission philosophy. here are some of my thoughts for effective automation policy and we need to be more explicit than we have been command traditionally we have seen a lot of -- over the past 20 years the maximum automation available as necessary for the flt. that is no longer sufficient. space here are some of my thoughts and these are excerpts from a paper i'm working on with a colleague of mine, so the operator has to be knowledgeable and highly sensitive to the limitations of the automation to minimize the impact on the flow of traffic and the maximize the smoothness and elegance of the human automation interaction switching and crew interface to i believe both mike and dave hid

on these as well. moving forward, to maintain a linear and consistent process, policies to the development of procedures and this provides the hirsi and provides a method for executing the precise tasks in a lot procedures. so, looking at the free market, the doctor provided that for some guiding principles. in the diagram form of this is what it looks like. philosophy dictate policies, policies are translated into procedures, and then at the very bottom we have practices. where the rubber meets the road, and realistically we can write the best philosophy and policies and procedures but how does it

hold in reality, and that is the true test of reality. and we see that in our work all the time. practices and it's what we do every day we prefer on the flight deck and should come from to procedures and policies. this displays the relationships visually. in a perfect world, philosophy would be the overarching guidance for policy which dictates procedures and then results in practices. sometimes there is no established procedure for a situation but as long as u.s. policy guidance, however, the expectation is very clear. you may even find a situation where there is no policy guidance. but as long as there is a

clearly defined philosophy articulated philosophy, the pile that has a general understanding of expectations. unfortunately, we can find ourselves in the situation where there is no overarching philosophy. and this is truly problematic for the pilot and the organization. now you are in uncharted territory. nobody wants to be there. and it's not expected in the normal operations. perhaps the aircraft is doing something unexpected that we have no mental model, i think air france or cold -- colgan 3407 can lead to some system behavior as the doctor was saying and have some thoughts for some other examples of the same kind of thing. all right. so the full peace free market.

here is the ideal. philosophy is the guiding light from that emerges culture and policy for everything. automation the emergencies and then what this translates to procedures, checklists, flows and with policies and procedures this is the ideal of course, and then we have the actual behavior during the wine operations. that's not real pretty, right? the for peace framework may be more realistic. philosophy is sort of hovering off in the distance, and loosely directing policy and scientific principles of to the side and a random feedback note and mechanism. not exactly sms ideal. procedures and policies are

written and designed and tested. but how did it hold up in practice? and how did it correspond to reality? that is the feedback and we need that. procedures are never 100% perfect but it's important to get the feedback to do the modification. so what can we do with respect to automation? first and foremost, consider the manufacturers policies and philosophy of automation. the have a design philosophy and that needs to be where we start, and then we need to work within our own organizations to fix the disconnect. heading into nextgen that is more important than ever. and only after we look at their philosophy and our own atrocity can we move towards the specific policy and flight task management. just some looks at different

philosophies of our manufacturers. and it's very important to know the environment you are working in and to start with that. that should be the foundation. i know. i wanted to expand on some of the parts of it and i know boeing has evolved a bit with the 787 and we thank them for at. so. the airlines need a much more salient automation flight path management policy. manufacturers automation philosophy is about design and, and it doesn't talk about the operation and it provides guidance for training procedures, a division of labor, workload management, and many of us operate those airbus and boeing on property and others as

well. so, really important to go back to the foundation before we jump in to create new procedures. i have a couple of examples to illustrate my point. so, the airline if you want to read it there is the philosophy. basically, this is how the operated for 30 years. their philosophy and procedural automation guidance, pretty clear. don't do it. then they realize potential savings in both time and fuel and using automation effectively end the whole airline policy had to be rewritten. it wasn't just about rewriting some procedures. it was an entire paradigm shift in their philosophy and their culture. it was a significant change. so, be cautious in changing the

order or the flow of things you need to back it up and support it with policy said the expectations for the pilot is clear. another example, and the specific point here is we have airline be in some of the aspects of their philosophy and the rigid culture required open dissent restricted on the a 30. directly related to the culture because then we have the airline much more flexible culture and the only restrict the open dissent at 500 feet. so the two airlines are operating the same aircraft and are significantly the local differences in their automation policy. the elements of style for designing the automation policy or flight path management was

the. biggest emphasis i feel i need to make at this point is the necessity of increase more inappropriate customized training for the pilots and the automation that we are expected to operate. in the near-term future we will be working with tolerance comes of separation, for d trajectory. we need to maintain manual flying skills more than anything. cognitive and motor skills will be great if they are not practiced. automated systems are tools not a replacement as operators or as monitors and we need to consider the role of the automation in the overall system. we've been seeing too many automation issues in recent years. we need to reverse the trend and it's time to do that at the threshold of nextgen. it's an opportunity. thank you very much.

[applause] thank you for showing us the importance of defining and implementing proper automation policies and procedures in order to maintain our sales operations we have now time for questions. we have the microphone set up on both sides of the room if you want to make sure we forward we can ask our panelists some questions. to begin, let me just start out and i will ask this to the panel immediately as we talk about the pilot's role in the system and with all the complexity is -- we have one speaker there. i will hold my question. >> i appear to be the question

man of this affair. my question is addressed to dr. woods and the panel in general. with regards to your discussion of brittleness and resilience in your model you've created, what recommendations would you consider for what is a brittle operational practice and this is the set up for the operational practice. our current expectation policy is the winter and during any and all malfunction if the aircraft system through the use of manual flying skills and basically that is keeping the shining side up for 30 seconds while they figure out what went wrong. most operators and many aerospace carriers require the pilot or aircraft to utilize all

of the automation of bedle from basically the time you get on the runway and the time to take off until pretty close to landing. there is little or no process or procedure is provided propel that maintenance of manual flying skills. how would you models this solution to this particular situation i think we find ourselves in? >> very quickly this is an old problem. i learned years ago from wonderful engineers the transfer of control. we talked about this in the past incidents and was part of the findings from the 1996 human factor cockpit automation reports that i was privileged to work on with many others, and we pointed out that the skilling and the erosion of the pilot skills would contribute to the difficulties in the plan, the

model safety that you just described. it wasn't as effective as we thought and was going to become less effective because the automation works so well pilots are not learning how to handle than on routine situations. the recommendation that we made back in the middle 90s was you have to practice more her mom routine situations, you have to practice handling a cascade of events. as you increase the autonomy these are the kind of trade-offs we did for the defense science board as you increase this aspect of autonomy there are predictable changes will happen just like you can anticipate various conditions as you look at the flight plan and you know some of the risks involved in the particular rich or particular approach. we can see these. we still have not taken this seriously. we have new cases of problems in this area, and it's time that we

move forward. notice the catch is that it takes resources. it takes time. we have a slight but the number of pilots and the cost of training. it's down to 30,000 each way? with dennett doesn't that send off a light bulb? this is what we said in the middle 90s with the initial training to proficiency getting easier and easier but long-term growth of expertise to new forms of air and ship their necessary were lagging and you are not the only ones dealing with this problem. the military deals with the problem as they become more and more automated as well and have to manage these resources. we can talk about it, we can react to it or we can get productive. [applause]

>> this is kind of fun being a spectator rather than being that there. [laughter] >> i'm enjoying it back here rather than up there. this one is directed kind of broadly by the whole panel that terry, you left your presentation on a little bit of a note. we interrupted a couple of times talking about a recovery situations and what the appropriate use of all these different kind of things and that discussion went towards beyond the procedures to the question about the development of the so-called big red recovery button and that has implications for uas. the question is do you see in terms of automation development and evolution us ever getting to

the point there will be a fully automated recovery system integrated into these airplanes because if you take the case of the qantas there would be no system that could have existed that would have saved that airplane. but in the superbly analysis and also autrey -- triage dealing with something in which the books clearly didn't speak to come and the was the slide with a circle way on the outside of the ring. so, kind of a pretty broad question but i figured i would throw it out to the panel because you look like to need some soft balls thrown at you may be a little bit of a hardball. and i apologize ahead of time. >> thanks for the very good question and free thought provoking. i think that from both the airbus and boeing what we are going to see in the future and

future designs is even then the degraded mode scum either degraded hydraulics or elect to the fraliex tracks flight mode are going to have basic protections in the air plan that will keep you from accepting the flight envelope and i think you'll also find the ability to use autopilot in a lot of the situations. might he alluded to that in his presentation earlier and only 380 which is the hydraulic controlled electoral hydrostatic controlled airplane we can switch off the hydraulic pounds because there are two of them per engine we can switch them off and still fly the airplane normally on the hydrostatic actuators and use autopilot. so i think you are going to see that. as far as the other part of your question which i thought was interesting whether he would have, you know, the recovery button where you could hit and then the year plan would automatically recover itself. it's a great concept and, you

know, when you think about it, let's think about it, but directly flight test and make it happen in the situations where you want it to happen and then go to all fringe cases is very difficult. we have discussed for example a system where if you had an encounter and the pilot wasn't properly reacting to the g p.o.w.s -- gpws would you have the airplane avoid hitting the train? again, think about the case is what speed does it occur, what descent, do you do that automatically as well? it is a very big matrix but it is something that needs to be considered for the future. >> you just made my case for resilience, right? we can improve as we understand different kinds of problem areas. but the kind of problems we face

will continue to emerge. new variations will emerge as we get better at handling certain uncertainties and difficulties. that is a guarantee. that is a part of the complexity results. you can't ease keep that in this universe. maybe you have a different universe we will start flying but in this one we can't completely skip those trade-offs and in the end, the ultimate safe haven is that you can demonstrate the ability to behave brilliantly when the surprise is happen in cascade. that is what you have to prove. my response ability to you is i can come up with the measures and demonstrations of how to do that. and that is my commitment to you. that the scientists will do that and we are trying to do that right now. >> good morning. dan with delta air lines. question for the whole panel and even you, dave.

what we heard from our representatives is maybe we can think of a pilot years ago a pyramid were the top pilot was the top of the parent and he kind of work down through it. what i'm hearing today is mabey now what is more linear where the pilot is just a system that is on the line. but as helena delude it to me there are black swans the pile that has to perform at a higher level. we have also heard where the piloting skills are degraded. a lot of a center half 1727 is coming on automated. if our skills are degraded, what skills with the new pilots who are learning an airplane that sometimes are even more complex than the airbus 8320 that i am flying, what kind of training or what kind of skills will they need or what kind of tools would be present to them to help them with those even start totally outside the realm of what the airplane can do?

>> is a fascinating question. as dr. woods pointed out and these other things. so we try really hard at boeing to have the chance to get free switches. essentially for the normal operations. when you go from one command passed to another command path to have that chance and between the not changed state. the break is one example. to have to have the brake pedals released so therefore you can't let the parking brake come off when an airplane is not stopped and you can't put the parking break off. we certainly try to have transient free switches its one of the demonstration points we have the switch in the overhead that terms of the flight controls and there is no bumps or anything but when we make the system better and better and better, the failure mode as we want to we want to have amazingly reliable air plans. we wish of transient until it is a more dramatic point. we are required -- normally in

your procedures, you know, you write procedures for ten to the - fifth few years and sometimes - seven failures due to the hydraulic system. we don't report for the - failures because they are not supposed to be designed by the airplane. richard in the 8380 had attended a minus 13. that's why he called the black swan event. as we push these out the experience was down. i was giving a presentation at a southeast asian carrier and a part of my presentation must talk about flying an airplane. i said how many people -- and i would give the same presentation at the airline and down in houston. the 500 people on the airline meeting in houston i asked them how many people in this room have at least on an airplane, two or three times? great. i would love to see that. i gave that same question to a southeast asian carrier and not one hand went up. and i'm so - i thought well my god i've got to change my

presentation because that didn't work. i thought i change my presentation, heck with that. we have people that have never actually been an extremist in an airplane but that is what we did in this business. so as we go through these systems, it's very difficult as an airplane designer because you want to push off, do want to have wonderful reliability. wonderful systems. but then when we give it back to the pilot we are going to give back a lot more airplanes than giving it back to them after the single fault. and i don't know what to do about that. ..

i would recall that that is a vacuum. no one in your today flies an airplane in a nice giant peaceful air space all by themselves. the coming changes to nextgen, the airspace, and the efficiencies that are being attempted to be designed into the airspace in order to increase the density of operations are going to force

us, it seems to me, to use, to rely on automation, the exclusion of allowing either human pilot for human controller to intervene. and isn't that the most brittle system you can imagine? because here we are talking about manual flying schools, manual reversion, getting the pilot back in the loop. but if the pilot can't turn the airplane safely within the constraints of the airspace he is operating in, it seems we have a looming, huge problem. i wonder if anybody would care to comment on how exactly we're going to address that? thank you. [applause] >> well, first of all, thanks, paul, for that comment because it is true that the airspace becomes more and more dense, pilots have to be able to operate in that high density environment and have to be able to do with manual skill sets.

i think that in our case, at airbus with our sites to control and with boeing with their wheel controller, modern flight control systems to compensate for a lot of the aerodynamic characteristics of the airplanes that the pilots never see anymore because they are so well past. i think the ability to control the airplane in terms of pitch and roll and bank, in case of our airplanes with automatic trimming systems. and boeing, the 10 systems are very well-designed. so with a minimum amount of effort you can retain the airplane to where you want it to be. to me it suggests that an annual flight we can meet those challenges in the future. i think that has to be that development has to be continued and we also have to provide it on the training site so that pilots can see that they can affect fly the airplane in those environments. and if they can come if manual

control is not possible than other measures have to be taken. if traffic becomes truly that dance in nextgen. >> the point that developing and designing systems as if there's no larger role to maintain resilience in the face of inevitable surprises and complications and real-world operations has been studied many times, and the answer is always the same trick when you over rely on the automation, it's going to be brittle. people adapt. responsible people in some roles will adapt to make the system continue to work. recall that how the operator, the sharpie and makes up the holes in the designers work. designers get better and better but they can have simplifications and limited resources as well. so the issue that you brought up is systems design that is pretty. this is the stuff that is covered in the distance -- the

defense science board report, the dod to take advantage. i doubt this to me people here who are pro-drone with our certain audiences out there that are seen drones as remotely piloted vehicle. we don't call them uas is because in the report we said it's way too much of an emphasis on the platforms just changing the title doesn't mean you're doing the systems engineering properly. and we run through these factors in order to avoid the otherwise to low score on brittleness. >> i agree very realistically, it's a looming problem. and i don't necessarily have a solution, but i do think that the training aspect of it, now looking at her next generation of pilots, they will have far less manual flags goes coming and environment than anyone has in the past. so we do have to take our

experience and mentor our younger generation. i think that's a huge part of it. as far as the overall like facing out pilot shortage issue, i think will have to take a huge responsibility and that moving forward. >> i guess i would like to think that we could have the system, because boeing also announced, i don't know what ago today, but airplanes are running about 85% efficient. we are not using its key assets, these multimillion, hundred million dollar assets to the greatest efficiency possible. and one way to do that is to take out all the slop and all the margin. instead of having four miles, three. put them at three miles. that means you don't get to fly at 150 knots because you want to that date because you're not very comfortable flying out the aside 140 knots. that's the air difference that goes in there. but i'd like to think that we

can devise a system and make an airplane that the pilots want to fly, that flies the same guidance that they out of my system would produce to the autopilot. if you a 737 person you know the autopilot can fly, you know, there's limitations of the auto flight system that kept on the navigation performance of the 737. the system was good enough but the limitation was how fast the autopilot could react to the system. so i think there's a capability in the industry and desire to hand fly the systems, and then went i think this as flying through the flight director. you know the airplane on approach flies at two degrees. two degrees nose up. if you're looking at, your own speak, i don't care what you want to do. if you keep your nose up and are coming down and the lights are lined up, they are not changing. pick your own speak at just the way it works. across the board on an airplane. take office this and takeoff office that.

i know the boeing company were having this conversation about what doesn't airplane do. procedures that are developed or developed for airplanes that have already gone through the delivery and build process. airbus, they fly the first flights. where procedures actually are not valid yet because the airplane has never flown. that are valid but you don't know what the fall is because it's never flown before. so i think there's a capability. i think that's a good resilience in the system is you get the pilot the same capability as the automatic system does. and then you try to encourage the pilots to fly that manual system and understand what the airplane just did on the automatic system so we automatic system dropped, they go i've been there before. i've been on approach, i know the pitch attitude. not necessarily the power settings. i know how this airplane flies. >> thank you, mike. we are out of time now for this

panel so i apologize but we will take questions during the break, after lunch. one, want to thank our distinguished panel are comingfrom and then turn it over to captain. [applause] >> thank you, dave, and thank you to your painless but very, very provocative panel. we are about to break for lunch but however i would like to ask everybody remain here in the hall. it's my honor to welcome back captain moak who would like to recognize some of our volunteers. captain moak. >> all right. thank you, chuck. what i like to do right now is a great thing about being the president of the airline pilots association is every so often you get one of those moments where you can actually have just

a little bit of fun. and this is going to be one of those moments. so with that i'd like first officer mark rogers and captain john taylor, please join me on the stage. as they are coming up here i'm going to each other, it's my honor and privilege to recognize these two pilot representatives for their outstanding commitment and dedication to air transportation safety, in the piloting profession. first officer rogers, please step forward just a little bit, sir. for more than a decade, and yes, i said a decade, united airlines first officer rogers has led the airline pilots association

efforts to improve the safe transportation of dangerous goods. his work has included projects to improve the safe transport of lithium batteries, training for flight and cabin crews in responding to onboard battery fires, and improvements in how pilots are notified about batteries aboard the aircraft. as the chairman of alpa, dangerous goods committee, first officer rogers is a devoting member of icao's dangerous goods panel. most recently, he was instrumental in icao's adoption of technical instructions outlining important safety precautions for the transportation of lithium batteries in the air. first officer rogers represents airline pilots interest at the united nations, and before a range of industry and government

bodies, including the faa, hamza, and the u.s. congress. he is a renowned voice for safety, both domestically and internationally. on behalf of of the associations 53,000 members, i'm proud to present a united airlines first officer mark rogers with alpa's 2011 presidential citation. [applause] >> now, i would like to ask captain john taylor to step forward, just ever so slightly, sir. captain john taylor currently serves as the express jet in

ec's alpa's pilot assistant chairman. and in this role, he oversees the pilot groups aeromedical, critical incident response program, hims, pilot mentoring and professional standards committees. as certified paramedic, captain taylor uses his medical knowledge to address c. r. r. p., fully assistance programs, family medical leave act, and long-term disability issues. on top of all the work on behalf of his fellow pilots he's also, with his spare time, pursuing a bachelor of science degree in nursing. following the express jet asa merger, captain taylor has single-handedly taken on many of the responsibilities are easily carried out by management personnel. he has worked to build a foundation for all pilots of the new express jet by courtney with

the atlantic southeast colleagues to develop training protocols, and procedures that will meet the medical and professional standards needs of the combined high that group. through his tireless efforts, express jet pilots continue to receive comprehensive assistance at a time when they need it most. on half of the association, i'm proud to present express jet captain john taylor with trend -- alpa's 2011 presidential citation. [applause] >> congratulations again to both of you all, and john, i need you around me since you are a certified paramedic, and in my roll i need someone with me all the time.

now you have a new addition a role. and with that i'm going to back over to chuck. thanks a lot. [applause] >> thank you, captain moak. that is a true honor and congratulations to the presidential citation award winners. with that it's time for lunch. you're on your own so feel free to grab a bite in the dining room. we continue just a few minutes after one. so please be back at the top of the hour. see you then. a special thanks to the airlines of america. [inaudible conversations]

>> as you heard, a lunch break at the airline pilots association safety conference. we will return to live coverage at about one-tenth the in issue for discussion of addressing pilot fatigue and that pilots can reduce fatigue based on the plane they are flying. again, back to that at about 110 eastern. h-net for today, sba administrator will wrap up the conference but the airline pilots association is the largest pilots union representing pilots in u.s. and canada. a conference happening here in washington, d.c. all this week. also we're taking a look at some of the pastors national press club luncheon speeches.

>> tonight on c-span, portions of these years aspen institute security forum. former u.s. ambassador to syria discuss some of the challenges remaining. this is a brief look at what ambassador christopher hill had to say. >> in the iraq we took on probably the toughest problem there is in the region. it's, after all, where the persian world meets the arab world, where the shia world meets the sunni world. where the turkey world meets the arab world. i cannot think of a tougher place. and so if you're going to go into the toughest place, don't just do it on adrenaline. do it by maybe doing a little homework. and they feel that we should have done an awful lot more homework about, you know, when you look at a dictator, the first question should not be how do we get rid of him.

the first question should be how to get there. and once you figure out how a person like saddam got there, that will help form the answer to how to get rid of them. clearly iraq has to be ruled by some combination of those three communities. that has to be how it works. but i mean to go in and to think that they be -- the debaathification in 1945 as opposed to getting sunnis out and replacing them with she can i do think we really understood where the fault lines really were. the fault line ftp leadership, democracy is something we understood. and we were right to rectify that, but the sunni-shia fault line has been there about 1000 years. and usually we have a fault line that's been there for a thousand years, you might want to be a little more attention to how

you're going to deal with it. so i'm not saying it was a very hard thing. i agree that it is going in the right direction. and i would put myself on the glass half-full side. i know president bush will take a lot of grief for the rest of history about the invasion of iraq, but i don't think anyone can say that he didn't have the guts to take on the toughest problem in the middle east. so i hope we can stay with it. i hope the obama administration will stay with it. you have the world's largest embassy embassy, don't we? we have a peruvian guard there still, ugandans, albanian gardeners, it was a regular tower of babel. i use some of my -- it was great. is a very unusual situation, but at this point i think we have to

kind of stay engaged on it. >> and you can see all of mr. hill's comments tonight at 8 p.m. each and c-span. following in at 92010 eastern a discussion with afghanistan and pakistan policies with the u.s. >> this weekend on american history tv -- >> we are selling george washington's personal copy of the acts of congress. we will start the bidding, ladies and gentlemen, at $1,300,000. 1,300,000, 1,400,000. 1,006,000. >> sunday at 7 p.m. asian and pacific american artifacts, christie's auction of george washington's 106 page ask of congress. inside along with the constitution a draft of the bill of rights. the book includes washington's own handwritten notes. also this weekend more from the

contenders. our series that looks at key political figures who ran for president and last but change political history. >> as it has been said, in the worst of times, a great people must do the best of things, and let us to. >> former u.s. senator in lbj's vice president, hubert humphrey sunday at 7:30 p.m. american history tv this weekend on c-span3. >> we will continue live coverage live coverage of the airline pilots association safety conference when they written at about 1:10 p.m. for addressing pilot fatigue. right now will go back to a discussion from this conference earlier today focusing on security involving travelers who are considered high risk. >> good morning, everyone. i hope you had an enjoyable evening and are fully captivated for a day of very interesting

discussions. i want to once again thank boeing, our sponsoring the reception last night and thanks to airlines for america, and all of our sponsors who, with the support can make this event possible. we appreciate your support. [applause] >> please mutual cellphones and other electronics to keep the muted while you were here in the hall. thank you. i don't think i will get an argument from this statement. nothing has changed more in the airline industry during the past 11 years and aviation security. whether it's the tsa striving to improve techniques for passenger screening, installing secondary barriers to better protect airline cockpits are worthless assault, or visionary initiatives like known crewmember program, tougher security is now a permanent component of today's aviation dna. the big question is as our

security network just gotten harder to get through, or has it gotten smarter? we are starting with a discussion on the risk-based concept, have to make the process more efficient, increasing the throughput and finding the bad guys before they can hurt us. moderating this panel is my esteemed colleague captain fred eissler, if rental express, alpa security chair. captain eissler. [applause] >> chart, thank you very much. good morning and welcome. i'm captain fred eissler. i served as the aviation security chairman and i fly for fedex express but it's a pleasure for me to welcome each of you to our conference today and to our panel discussion on the need for weeding out evildoers the risk-based security. this discussion is intended to delve in and numerous aspects of risk-based security initiatives and programs that are applied

throughout the aviation sector by government and industry. we are pleased to be joined by distinguished government and industry subject matter experts. who will provide us with their organizations perspective on the use of risk-based security measures in protecting the aviation domain. they are bios are included in your conference packet. please feel free to read them at your leisure. we have put together a top notch agenda for a discussion and expect it will generate a great deal of interest and questions. time has been reserved for question and answer period at the end of the discussion so please hold your questions and tell them. i will take off the discussion by offering thoughts about alpa's perspective on the need for risk-based security, and sights and sounds of her efforts in this regard. following my comments we'll hear from each of our distinguished guests. a risk-based approach to palms on any aviation domain is not a new concert. this strategy has been prevalent

in air safety ring matters for decades. its use has become more prevalent over the years, particularly in the identification of precursors to accidents and incidents. it is clear the way forward in aviation security is through an intelligence driven risk-based approach. the vast budget of people and cargo transport on commercial aircraft pose no intended threat to aviation. knowing this, a one size fits all approach to screening does not make good sense, nor is it most effective use of our limited screening resources. in fact adopting and one size fits all screening approach in the aviation environment waste time and resources and reduces achievable margins of security. alpa has advocated the need for intelligence driven risk-based aviation security strategies long before the events of 9/11. for example, in the mid 1990s our association was a major contributor to the development

oof the original computer assisted passenger prescreening system, or capps program. capps was developed as a methodology for prescreening airline passengers in order to identify those persons considered to pose a higher degree of risk to aviation, and then subject them and belong to appropriate levels of screening. early last year alpa published a white paper on risk-based security which advocated for many of the kinds of changes that tsa has made or is presently making. following the 9/11 attacks our nation witnessed the creation of the department of homeland security and the transportation security administration. we also saw the reinvigoration of the federal air marshal assistant service, alpa enjoys a very close working relationship with the fams, and we are pleased to have director, the

director of the fams, mr. bob bray, with us today. another of the early post-9/11 programs that alpa strongly promoted is the cass are cockpit access security system. because of legitimate security concerns stemming from the 9/11 attacks, pilots traditional access to the flight deck was severely limited by government regulation. these restrictions had a noticeable negative impact on airline, industry operations. capps result those concerned by a affording a reliable means to positively identify a pilots identity and current employment status in real-time. facilitating flight crew members and faa offers jump personal to write in the cockpit jump seat once again. data testing of this program begin on august 10, 2003, and the full implementation was approved in june 2004.

cass is in use today. speaking of the pilot screen, alpa has advocated for all airline pilots to be subjected to alternate risk-based methodology that is different from traditional checkpoint screening protocols. to remedy this problem, alpa conceived of crewpass, cruel personnel advanced screening system your crewpass that was presented to tsa in may of 2007 favorable consideration by the tsa resulted in the program being implemented as the agency's first disk-based aviation security initiative in 2008. at three airports this occurred, bwi, pitt and columbia, south carolina. crewpass has been replaced by a new system called known crewmember. known criminal is a rapidly expanding program cosponsored by

alpa and american airlines for america, or a for pay with the support of the tsa. -- 848. it is operate in 18 airports and is planted in 31 domestic airports by the end of calendar year 2012. it is the centerpiece of the growing list of tsa risk-based initiatives and is now accompanied by others such as precheck, passengers under 12 or over 75 years of age, on our flights and use of vehicle detection officers. we are grateful to the tsa administrator john pistole for spearheading his agency's focus on implementing risk-based screening protocols, and we are extremely pleased to have doug hofsass, tsa associate minister for risk-based security with us today to elaborate more on tsa's perspective on its risk-based security efforts. among those other government agencies adopting risk-based security programs is customs and border protection, cbp.

we are grateful for cd peace efforts in this regard, such as the global entry and us-visit program's. which are designed to reduce delays, associate with international travelers prior to the entry into the united states. its participation in the national target center, customs and trade partnership against terrorism, initiative and other risk-based programs, cbp spearheads to protect our nation's borders. we look forward to hearing about the cbp initiatives from poor director terry davis who is joining us today as cbp's representative. along with us today to provide insights on the increase application of risk-based security strategies and the off cargo world is the airlines for america, america's cargo service director, ms. liz shaver. among other things, lives will talk about the application of the air cargo advanced screening system, or a gas in both passenger and off cargo