The research behind it
The research showed where ramp incidents start: in the conditions on ordinary turnarounds, long before anything is damaged or anyone is hurt.
NOMIC Ramp began at a major Australian airline, where a team of psychologists and human factors specialists developed a LOSA-style observation programme for the ramp. It was then developed further as part of a PhD at UNSW Aviation, which studied ramp safety through Normal Operations Monitoring of normal work.
The research analysed 1,302 ramp turnarounds observed across several airlines in one airline group's network, at international, domestic and regional ports. It built on the airline's own ramp observation programme.
Findings from the research
From the analysis of the reference turnarounds, as presented at industry safety forums. Odds ratios for specific sub-categories, so they are larger than the category-level links in the sample report.
- With freight and baggage threats, the odds of an irregular load were about six times higher.
- When badly packed freight reached the bay, the odds that the loading supervisor didn't supervise the loading were about eight times higher.
- With missing line markings, the odds of equipment not being staged correctly were about twelve times higher.
- Near collisions with the aircraft were preceded by driving variations such as speeding and towing too much equipment.
- Ramp crews rarely managed the threats and variations they met; few ramp teams get the threat and error management training pilots and cabin crew have.
What the 1,302 turnarounds showed
| Turnarounds with at least one | Per turnaround | |
|---|---|---|
| Conditions that made work as imagined harder to do | 85.4% | 2.25 |
| Variations: work as done differed from work as imagined | 91.5% | 3.99 |
| Undesired states (e.g. load or equipment problems) | 8.8% | 0.11 |
The most common were driving variations (in 75.7% of turnarounds), other parties' driving and vehicles (51.8%) and equipment use (51.2%).
Links between conditions and variations
Odds ratio with 95% interval: how much more likely a kind of variation was in turnarounds that had the condition. From the same reference data the app compares your results with.
| Condition | Variation | Odds ratio (95% interval) | Turnarounds with the condition |
|---|---|---|---|
| Operational pressure | Bay preparation | 4.96 (3.05–8.08) | 113 |
| Arriving load irregularities | Unloading | 3.98 (2.31–6.88) | 69 |
| Freight and baggage | Loading | 3.83 (2.85–5.14) | 297 |
| Documentation | Restraint | 3.42 (1.90–6.13) | 48 |
| Freight and baggage | Readback | 3.33 (2.45–4.53) | 297 |
| Freight and baggage | Restraint | 2.95 (2.21–3.94) | 297 |
| Communication from others | Communication | 2.69 (1.56–4.63) | 135 |
| Communication from others | Driving | 2.59 (1.51–4.43) | 135 |
Many pairs were compared, so a few links may be chance. These are links, not proof of cause.
About the reference data
- Most turnarounds come from one large network operation, whose procedures shaped what counted as a variation.
- It used the original codes only: no enablers, good practice or on-time outcome were recorded.
- It is a point of comparison, not a standard to meet.
The figures above are aggregates. No airline, port, date or person can be identified from them.
How to cite NOMIC Ramp
NOMIC Ramp: Normal Operations Monitoring for ground operations. NOMIC Research Pty Ltd.