Analytical Hierarchy Process for Risk Management in the Stabilized Flight Approach - Expert Judgment

Juan Carlos  Pedroza; Alejandro Peña; Lina Sepúlveda-Cano; João Vidal  Carvalho

doi:10.55267/djfm/14419

Analytical Hierarchy Process for Risk Management in the Stabilized Flight Approach - Expert Judgment

Juan Carlos Pedroza ¹, Alejandro Peña ¹ ^* , Lina Sepúlveda-Cano ¹, João Vidal Carvalho ²

More Detail

¹ School of Management, EAFIT University, Medellin, Colombia
² CEOS, Porto Accounting and Business School, Polytecnhic University of Porto, Portugal
^* Corresponding Author

Full Text (PDF)

Research Article

Dutch Journal of Finance and Management, 2024 - Volume 7 Issue 1, Article No: 26497
https://doi.org/10.55267/djfm/14419

Published Online: 27 Mar 2024

Views: 975 | Downloads: 647

Open Access

How to cite this article

APA 6th edition

In-text citation: (Pedroza et al., 2024)
Reference: Pedroza, J. C., Peña, A., Sepúlveda-Cano, L., & Carvalho, J. V. (2024). Analytical Hierarchy Process for Risk Management in the Stabilized Flight Approach - Expert Judgment. Dutch Journal of Finance and Management, 7(1), 26497. https://doi.org/10.55267/djfm/14419

Vancouver

In-text citation: (1), (2), (3), etc.
Reference: Pedroza JC, Peña A, Sepúlveda-Cano L, Carvalho JV. Analytical Hierarchy Process for Risk Management in the Stabilized Flight Approach - Expert Judgment. DUTCH J FINANCE MANA. 2024;7(1):26497. https://doi.org/10.55267/djfm/14419

AMA 10th edition

In-text citation: (1), (2), (3), etc.
Reference: Pedroza JC, Peña A, Sepúlveda-Cano L, Carvalho JV. Analytical Hierarchy Process for Risk Management in the Stabilized Flight Approach - Expert Judgment. DUTCH J FINANCE MANA. 2024;7(1), 26497. https://doi.org/10.55267/djfm/14419

Chicago

In-text citation: (Pedroza et al., 2024)
Reference: Pedroza, Juan Carlos, Alejandro Peña, Lina Sepúlveda-Cano, and João Vidal Carvalho. "Analytical Hierarchy Process for Risk Management in the Stabilized Flight Approach - Expert Judgment". Dutch Journal of Finance and Management 2024 7 no. 1 (2024): 26497. https://doi.org/10.55267/djfm/14419

Harvard

In-text citation: (Pedroza et al., 2024)
Reference: Pedroza, J. C., Peña, A., Sepúlveda-Cano, L., and Carvalho, J. V. (2024). Analytical Hierarchy Process for Risk Management in the Stabilized Flight Approach - Expert Judgment. Dutch Journal of Finance and Management, 7(1), 26497. https://doi.org/10.55267/djfm/14419

MLA

In-text citation: (Pedroza et al., 2024)
Reference: Pedroza, Juan Carlos et al. "Analytical Hierarchy Process for Risk Management in the Stabilized Flight Approach - Expert Judgment". Dutch Journal of Finance and Management, vol. 7, no. 1, 2024, 26497. https://doi.org/10.55267/djfm/14419

ABSTRACT

Destabilised approaches have been the primary cause of fatal accidents during the approach and landing phase, as stated in (Airbus, 2023). The stabilised approach concept is of great importance for the safe operation of an airline during the approach and landing phases (Acarbay & Kiyak, 2020). The elements highlighted in the approach phases are the runway's dry or contaminated condition and length. In the crew, we analyse their competence, recurrence, and fatigue. Another variable is the type of approach, whether it is precision, non-precision or visual. The external conditions of the aerodrome include obstacles, wind, and wildlife—the type of aircraft, whether light, medium or heavy. Due to the large amount of qualitative information derived from the pilots' experience about risk management in the approach and landing phases, this paper proposes an Analytic Hierarchy Process model (AHP) for threat characterisation and risk analysis to achieve a stabilised approach. The results show that AHP proposed model establishes a new methodology for identifying potential in-flight risks to air operations based on expert criteria, improving the decisions to land at an alternate airport based on qualitative information from expert pilots in the risk management field.

KEYWORDS

Analytic Hierarchy Process Approach Phase Stabilised Approach Qualitative Expert Opinion Risk Management

REFERENCES

Acarbay, C. & Kiyak, E. (2020). Risk mitigation in unstabilized approach with fuzzy Bayesian bow-tie analysis. Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology.
Airbus (2023). Airbus Safety First. [Online] Available at: https://safetyfirst.airbus.com/prevention-of-unstable-approaches/[Accessed 06 12 2023].
Bernsmed, K., Bour, G., Lundgren, M. & Bergstrom, E. (2022). An evaluation of practitioners’ perceptions of a security risk assessment methodology in air traffic management projects. Journal of Air Transport Management, Volume 102, p. 102223.
Boeing (2014). Why and When to Perform a Go-Around Maneuver, s.l.: Boeing.
Bourjade, S. & Muller-Vibes, C. (2023). Optimal leasing and airlines' cost efficiency: A stochastic frontier analysis. Journal of Air Transport Management, Volume 176, p. 103804.
Coyle, G. (2004). Practical Strategy: AHP. s.l.:Pearson Education Limited.
Federal Aviation Administration FAA (2009). Risk Management Hand Book. FAA-H-8083-2, s.l.: FAA.
Gándara Martínez, J. (2022). Revolución en los cielos. Segunda ed. s.l.:Profit.
Guo, Y. et al. (2023). Deep-Learning-Based Model for Accident-Type Prediction During Approach and Landing. IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, 59(1), pp. 472-482.
Harjanto, S., Setiyowati & Vulandari, R. T. (2021). Application of Analytic Hierarchy Process and Weighted Product Methods in Determining the Best Employees. Indonesian Journal of Applied Statistics, 4(2), pp. 103-112.
Houwayji, S. (2024). The Influence of Risk Management Practices on Financial Market Stability: Insights from Lebanon. Dutch Journal of Finance and Management, 7(1), p. 25671.
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) (2018). Doc 9859. Manual de gestión de la seguridad operacional, Quebec: ICAO.
Lakshmi, V. & Udaya, K. (2024). A novel randomized weighted fuzzy AHP by using modified normalization with the TOPSIS for optimal stock portfolio selection model integrated with an effective sensitive analysis. Expert Systems with Applications, Volume 243, p. 122770.
Lee, K. (2023). Airline operational disruptions and loss-reduction investment. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Volume 177, p. 102817.
Liu, W. et al. (2024). Comparison of performance between PMS and trombone arrival route topologies in terminal maneuvering area. Journal of Air Transport Management, Volume 115, p. 102532.
Loukopoulos, L. D., Dismukes, R. K. & Barshi, I. (2009). The Multitasking Myth: Handling Complexity in Real-World Operations. s.l.:Routledge.
Madzík, P. & Falát, L. (2022). State-of-the-art on analytic hierarchy process in the last 40 years: Literature review based on Latent Dirichlet Allocation topic modelling.. PLoS One, 17(5).
Milbredt, O., Popa, A., Doenitz, F.-C. & Hellman, M. (2022). Aviation security automation: The current level of security automation and its impact. Journal of Airport Management, 16(2), pp. 184-208.
Muecklich, N., Sikora, I., Paraskevas, A. & Padhra, A. (2023). Safety and reliability in aviation – A systematic scoping review of normal accident theory, high-reliability theory, and resilience engineering in aviation. Safety Science, Volume 162, p. 106097.
Muñoz-Marrón, D. (2018). Human Factors in Aviation: CRM (Crew Resource Management). Papeles del Psicólogo / Psychologist Papers, 39(3), pp. 191-199.
Nguyen, G. H. (2014). The Analytic Hierarchy Process: A Mathematical Model for Decision Making Problems. Wooster: The College of Wooster Libraries.
Nuñez, M. et al. (2023). Risk governance in the textile/clothing industry: A case study in medium enterprises. Dutch Journal of Finance and Management,, 6(2), p. 25191.
Pamplona, D. A., de Barros, A. G. & Alves, C. J. (2021). Performance-Based Navigation Flight Path Analysis Using Fast-Time Simulation. Energies, 14(22).
Pant, S. et al. (2022). Consistency Indices in Analytic Hierarchy Process: A Review. Mathematics, 10(8).
Peña , P. et al. (2018). A fuzzy ELECTRE structure methodology to assess big data maturity in healthcare SMEs. Soft Computing, 23(20), pp. 10537-10550.
Petrillo, A., Pamplona, V. & Tramarico, C. (2023). State-of-the-Art Review on the Analytic Hierarchy Process with Benefits, Opportunities, Costs, and Risks. J. Risk Financial Manag, 16(8), p. 372.
Saaty, R. W. (1987). The analytic hierarchy process—what it is and how it is used. Mathematical Modelling, 9(3-5), pp. 161-176.
Taneja, N. (2007). Fatigue in Aviation: A Survey of the Awareness and Attitudes of Indian Air Force Pilots. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, pp. 275-284.
Toskano Hurtado, G. B. (2005). Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos. [Online] Available at: https://sisbib.unmsm.edu.pe/bibvirtualdata/tesis/basic/toskano_hg/toskano_hg.pdf [Accessed 06 12 2023].
Xin, F., Jun-Cheng, J., Jun-Qiang, L. & Yue-Gui, F. (2019). Airline safety assessment based on fuzzy mathematics and Bayesian networks. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 37(6), pp. 8577-8587.

LICENSE

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.