Transport and airports, Visual Inspection
When the model and the inspector disagree, the inspector decides and the record proves it
Under the CAA or the ORR, the question that decides a deployment is what happens in the seconds after a vision model and the person on the asset part company. This page walks that disagreement path for IBM Maximo Visual Inspection. The general capability sits on our Visual Inspection page, and the sector on Maximo for transport and airports.
The record, issued as a document
What lands on the work record when an image is judged
DOC-VI-REC-01
Every assisted inspection writes the same fields. CAP 168 aerodrome manuals and ROGS safety management systems both reach for this record; RAIB investigations reach for it years later.
| Field | Source | Target | Frequency | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IMAGE_URI | Inspector device, capture step | Manage work record | Per capture | Competent inspector |
| PROPOSED_CLASS | Visual Inspection model | Manage work record | Per capture | Model operations |
| MODEL_VERSION | Trained model registry | Manage work record | Per capture | Model operations |
| JUDGEMENT | Inspector confirm or override | Manage work record | Per capture | Competent inspector |
| COMPETENCY | Inspector authorisation record | Manage work record | Per capture | Inspection programme owner |
| ASSETNUM | IBM Maximo Manage asset register | Inspection location binding | Per walk | Your asset data owner |
The worked scene
One image, one disagreement, one minute
The moment a vision deployment in a safety-critical regime is judged on: an ordinary walk where the model is wrong and an experienced inspector says so without leaving the surface. Illustrative composite of inspection patterns.
-
Capture
On a scheduled pavement inspection, the inspector photographs a section that looks like weathering over an old repair, against the asset, location and time.
Written Image bound to the asset and the walk timestamp.
-
Model
Classifies it as a defect class that would ordinarily mark follow-up, at moderate confidence, shown as a proposal with the class named.
Written Proposed class and confidence against the image, with model version.
-
Inspector
Disagrees: staining over a previously repaired joint, no loss of material. One selection and one short sentence.
Written Override, reason, name and competency.
-
Manage
No work order is raised, because the person on the ground said there was nothing to raise.
Written Full disagreement record on the asset: image, version, proposal, override, competency, time.
-
Supervisor
Reviews the pattern weekly. Several overrides on the same class inside a fortnight sends that class back for retraining.
Written Aggregate override pattern against the defect class; retraining candidate flagged.
The model proposes a class. The inspector decides. Manage records the image, the version, the judgement and the name of the person who made it.
Two directions, three gates
What a false flag costs, and what a miss costs
Treating both as one accuracy number is how a vision deployment loses an inspection team. The asymmetry is built into the workflow, the escalation and the record before go-live.
-
Gate 1 Model flags, inspector clears
Signed by The competent inspector on the walk
Passes
Override with a written reason in seconds. Image and judgement join the labelled set. Pattern reviewed weekly by the supervisor.
Held back
A regime change on the strength of one image. A false flag costs seconds; it is managed by review, not by escalation.
-
Gate 2 Model silent, inspector flags
Signed by Inspection supervisor, same day
Passes
Work raised exactly as before the model existed. Miss logged against the defect class the same day.
Held back
Waiting for the weekly review. A miss on a safety-relevant class can take that class off the model until recall recovers.
-
Gate 3 Class recall below the bar
Signed by Your inspection programme owner
Passes
Class runs inspector-only. Model hidden for that class until the next validated version.
Held back
Leaving a weak class visible because the aggregate accuracy figure still looks acceptable.
Prerequisites
What standing Visual Inspection up in this sector requires
The inspection window
- First measurement
- Time the capture step inside the live slot before scoping the model
- Tight windows
- Hands-free capture patterns from MaxIron Nova where both hands are occupied
- Device
- Inspector device running the same Mobile workflow as the rest of the regime
- First candidates
- Runway and pavement FOD walks, rolling-stock checks, lineside surveys; output often feeds Health on safety-critical classes
The defect dictionary
- Authors
- Written with the inspectors who carry the regime, class by class
- Disagreement
- Unresolved inspector disagreement is settled and recorded before training
- Validation
- Measured against the team’s own historical decisions, per class
- Go-live rule
- Classes below the agreed bar stay inspector-only until recall is good enough
The run state
- Regime frame
- CAA and CAP 168 for licensed aerodromes; ROGS and ORR for GB rail; RAIB reaches for the same records
- Override record
- Person, reason, competency, model version and image on the work record
- Drift
- Scheduled monitoring; retraining is a planned operation
- Platform
- MAS on the same estate as Manage, under MaxIron-managed hosting
The UK airport Manage and Mobile programme that set the audit-trail discipline behind this page is written up in MAS for terminal and airside operations.
Boundaries
Three boundaries on Visual Inspection in this sector
Each one changes what a first workflow should contain, so each is stated before scoping.
The competent person named in the regime holds the call
A classification is an input to that person’s judgement, and the record is built so it reads that way. That matters most in an investigation, where the record is examined first.
Drift monitoring is an ongoing operating commitment
A hardware refresh, a seasonal change in light, a resurfaced pavement or a repainted vehicle all move a model. Accuracy stays visible past the build.
The inspection window has to carry a capture step
Where the window has no room for capture, the answer is a redesigned step or a different workflow. We establish that during scoping, drawing on Maximo Mobile and Nova where the slot is tight.
IBM Maximo Visual Inspection for transport and airports, questions we are asked first
- Which transport and airport inspection workflows are typical first candidates?
- Runway and pavement FOD walks, rolling-stock undercarriage and bodyshell checks, lineside infrastructure inspections, baggage system checks, and similar safety-critical workflows where the inspection is frequent, the cost of a missed defect is high, and the defect class is well-defined enough for a model to learn it.
- What happens when the model and the inspector disagree?
- The inspector decides, and the disagreement is recorded with a reason, a name and a competency. A false flag is reviewed in aggregate on a schedule; a miss on a safety-relevant class is escalated the same day and can take that class out of service until recall recovers.
- How does this fit with ORR, CAA and RAIB expectations?
- Aerodromes work to CAA requirements and an accepted aerodrome manual; GB rail duty holders work under ROGS, enforced by the ORR. RAIB investigates rather than enforces, and reaches for the same records. Visual Inspection helps when every classification and override carries the work order, asset, inspector, timestamp and model version.
- How does it fit with Maximo Mobile?
- The practical workflow lives on the inspector’s device. We typically deliver Visual Inspection with Maximo Mobile. Where the window is tight or both hands are occupied, the capture patterns behind MaxIron Nova are the other half of the same conversation.
Bring one workflow and the images you already have.
We time the window with you, read your defect classes as a model would, and say which classes are realistic to assist on now. If the window has no slack for a capture step, that answer comes first.
Bring this to the first call
- The inspection workflow with the volume or consistency problem, and how long its window is
- Roughly how many images you already hold for it, and whether the defects in them were recorded
- Your defect classes as they are written today
- Who is competent to make the call, and who would review their overrides