Part 121 · Part 135 · Air tour · Regionals
Connect ground incidents, root-cause work and the next shift.
Your airline already has a safety management system. ASIP helps the ground and station teams within it manage incidents, investigate contributing causes and put reviewed learning into the next daily or shift briefing.
Bring station reports, investigation and RCA records, vehicle-specific GSE checks and corrective actions into the same operating context. Managers curate briefing content for the line of business, station and team, while protecting the boundaries between airline, contractor and employer records.
An illustrative workflow, not a customer result
From a station event to reviewed causes and a relevant briefing.
Capture and manage the station incident.
Record the ground event, activity and permitted evidence. Keep any relevant vehicle QR inspection or defect record in context and route the report for authorized triage.
Investigate causes and verify action.
Use the documented HFACS and 5-why process, human review and approved corrective work. Retain the rationale and verification evidence within the airline's ground-safety scope.
Brief the relevant ground team.
Turn released lessons and local operating notes into a manager-reviewed daily or shift briefing for the configured station, line-of-business and role audience.
Manage the ground event and its investigation together.
An aircraft-damage event, near miss or station safety concern should retain the facts behind it: the activity, location, permitted evidence and relevant equipment check. Keep the report, triage and investigation traceable rather than asking each station to reconstruct the story.
Station leaders can follow the work they own. Authorized safety leaders can inspect the underlying record and outstanding actions across their granted locations, without treating a summary as the evidence itself.
Explore the conditions behind the action, then close the gap.
Use the documented HFACS and 5-why workflow to examine operational pressures and human, supervisory and organizational factors. The investigator examines contributing conditions and evidence; software does not issue a root-cause verdict.
Ask how turnaround targets, staffing, tools, handovers or the procedure shaped the event, rather than conclude only that someone lacked awareness. The investigator decides which angles to pursue and which conclusions the evidence supports.
Make the response specific: change a process, close an identified training gap or clarify a manual, with an owner and verification evidence. Investigators and authorized reviewers retain the conclusions and approvals. Released lessons can feed a relevant team briefing; publication and closure are not autonomous AI decisions.
Curate daily and shift briefings for the station team.
Use released lessons, authorized station context and manager-added notes to prepare relevant safety briefings for ramp, baggage, cargo or other ground teams. A station dealing with a local repeat concern should not have to rely only on a generic network message.
A manager reviews and publishes through the required approvals, with configured station, line-of-business and role audiences. Individual acknowledgment and recorded delivery remain distinct; a shift label is not an automatic roster filter. Restricted incident or contractor data is not made briefing content simply because it exists.
Keep equipment checks and assurance in the same picture.
Use QR-linked checks for individual vehicles and GSE, with applicable equipment questions, defect history and controlled serviceability decisions. Keep a relevant check or defect alongside the operating evidence used in the investigation.
Approved contractor audits and verified corrective work remain part of ground assurance. Demonstrate each participant's permitted access: a multi-station view inside one organization is not unrestricted federation between independent companies.
Replace covered work, not your responsibilities
- Evaluate replacing
- Agreed ground/station incident management, investigation and RCA follow-up, vehicle inspection records, contractor-assurance tracking, corrective actions and briefing preparation or acknowledgment trackers within the airline's existing program.
- Keep specialist authority
- Flight-data monitoring, FOQA/FDM, Event Review Committees, protected reporting programs, flight operations and airline operational control. ASIP does not replace FOQA or confer regulatory acceptance. Regulatory duties, risk acceptance and provider systems outside agreed access and replacement scope remain with their responsible owners.
- Current readiness and limits
- Validate the configured incident-to-investigation-to-briefing flow and participant access. Current analysis scope is HFACS and 5-why, not an unrestricted method selector. Briefings require enabled modules and controlled publishing. Shift labels do not select a roster, and automatic business-line source curation is not established. No full flight-SMS replacement or automatic protected-data sharing is implied.
Count a retired subscription only after the replacement is accepted and the cost can stop. Measure recovered administrative capacity separately from cash savings, and include migration, retention and overlapping contracts.
What it costs, and what changes it
Aviation - Airline
From $179/month or $1,790 annual prepaid
Published starting band: 1–10 covered employees, 1 site included. USD.
Your employee band and site count determine the total, without individually purchased user seats. The calculator shows included sites, extra-site charges and monthly versus annual-prepaid totals. Enterprise is separately scoped from its published annual floor.
Available modules and implementation, migration, training, support, taxes and additional-product charges must be confirmed for your scope. A module name is not a promise that every developing workflow is available.
See your price without contact detailsQuestions before you switch
- How does ASIP fit an airline with an established SMS?
- Evaluate the ground and station work it can take on: incident management, human-led HFACS/5-why investigations, tangible corrective work, vehicle inspections and briefing workflows. Live investigation AI requires separate enablement and validation. Flight operations, protected reporting, flight-data analysis and the airline's accountable decisions are not replaced by implication.
- How are briefings curated for a business line, station and team?
- Managers review released lessons and authorized station context, add local notes and approve publication. Configured station, line-of-business and role audiences define who receives the briefing. Confirm rollout activation; a shift label is not a roster filter, and automatic business-line-specific content selection is not established.
- Can airline and service-provider teams use the same evidence?
- Only within the access and workflow explicitly configured and demonstrated for them. A relevant vehicle-specific QR check or audit can support the ground event, but restricted employer or contractor records do not become universally visible, and internal multi-station oversight is not general tenant federation.