本研究參考國際航空運輸協會航空類器失事原因類別之定義建立編碼系統，將A公司中飛航操作品質保證系統之非標準飛行事件資料進行分析編碼並建立資料庫。每一非標準飛行事件之航班基本資料（事項編碼、事項嚴重程度、航班編號、飛行編號、起飛時間、到達時間、起飛地點、目的地點、飛行員之職稱、落地飛行員之背景、飛行技術等級、進場狀況），以及事件之影響因素（人為因素：8類、環境因素：6類，與航管因素：5類）。

　　資料庫目前建立”400呎高於下滑道”（FOQA資料監控系統1316事件）與”500呎速度過大”（FOQA資料監控系統1012事項）兩標準飛行事項之事件，統計分析後之顯示出1316事項因「人員判斷誤失」及「環境視障影響」而產生； 1012事項則最常出現「人員判斷誤失」與「未遵守標準作業程序」兩項；環境方面顯示出1012事項受「陣風」影響為最大主因。

　　資料庫中目前資料有限，不宜進行定量化統計分析，在未來期望擴大資料數量，結合與飛行組員訪談資料及問卷調查資料，經交互相比對後可對人為與環境因素在做更進一步的探討，提供飛航操作品質保證系統更深入的應用，以去除有害飛行安全的潛在風險。

　This thesis research modified the IATA Accident/Incident Cause Classifications system to construct a database to analyze the non-standard flight events in the Flight Data Monitoring (FDM) System of a local airline. The entities of each entry in the database included the background information of each non-standard flight events, such as flight number, departure and arrival times and airports, position and skill level of the pilot, and the mode of approach and landing, as well as the cause factors of the non-standard events. The coding of the cause factors focused on human error and environmental effects, and was categorized into 8 different types of human factors, 6 types of environmental factors, 5 types of air traffic control factors, and others.

　Presently, "Path high at 400ft ALT_AFE" (Type 1) and "Approach speed high at 500ft ALT_AFE" (Type 2) types of non-standard events were studied and coded in the database. Out of 4059 flights, 88 Type 1 events were detected. After analysis, Type 1 events were likely caused by “pilot’s misjudgment” and “local visual barrier.” For Type 2 events, 91 events were detected for 9355 flights. Most frequently type 2 events were likely caused by “pilot’s misjudgment” and “Non-compliance with SOP”, as well as by the environment factor of “Gust wind.”

　The amount of entry in the database is still small now and is not adequate to perform full statistical analyses. Besides expanding of the database, interviews to the fly crew as well as questionnaire survey to them are also requisite to justify the accuracy of the analyses in order to locate the potential risk in the flight operations.

【1】 Statistical Summary of Commercial Jet Aircraft Accident Worldwide Operation 1959-2001
【2】 WR. John w.Purvis “Lecture notes on combustion Chemistry and Diagnostics for Propulsion System” Vol-1 1994, pp. 5-21
【3】 Rebecoa D. Chute “Cockpit - Cabin communication ∥ Shall We Talk to the Pilots” JAP, Cabin safety, 1996, pp. 211-231
【4】 Graoeski, JG; Curriero. FC; Baker. SP. Li. G “Geographic patterns of pilot fatality rates in commuter and air taxi crashes” Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine,2002, pp. 1014-1020
【5】 J. Bryan Sexton ＆ Robert L. Helmreich “Analyzing Cockpit Communication： The Links Between Language, Performance, Error, and Workload” 1999
【6】 McFadden, K. L., ”Comparing Pilot-error Accident Rates of Male and Female Airline Pilots,” Omega, Vol. 24, NO.4, 1996, pp.443-450
【7】 Xie Zinzn, Shu Ping, Yu Liling and Xu Xiangsong “The Foqa Project in China” Sharing Knowledge to Improve Safety, 2004, pp. 73-79
【8】 Capt. Mike Holtom , ”FOQA：Aviation’s most important tool,” IASS, 1999, pp.209-222
【9】 Douglas A. Wiegmann “A Human Error of Commercial Aviation Accidents Using the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System（HFACS）”Feb, 2001
【10】 Capt. Sharon G. Jones, Ph.D ＆ Captain Bruce Tesmer “A New Tool for Investigating and Tracking Human Factors Issues in Incidents”1999