Pilot Technology Dependancy - Research Paper Example

Pilot Technology Dependency Introduction Pilot’s capacity to maintain awareness of their direction and position in space, their proximity to other aircraft and the ground, and their overall situational awareness, is vital to the safety of the airplane and lives of those within it. It is imperative to note that, even the pilots with the best possible training and the most eminent flying experience are capable of making poor decisions, most of which arise from reduced situational awareness. This is a problem that engineers seek to solve with the new generation of airplanes; fully equipped with advanced, synchronized computerized displays showing aircraft and navigation data. However, this widespread automation of aircraft has sparked contention over the preceding few years. Proponents of automation argue that, if operated proficiently, the automated instruments significantly enhance pilots’ situational awareness and consequently improve flight safety. However, opposing parties contend that the instruments are likely to fail and cause catastrophic accidents. They also insist that pilots may over rely on the computerized equipment and fail to notice errors, culminating in devastating aircraft accidents. This paper explores how pilots’ overdependence on technology is lulling them into a false perception of security, making them cause accidents that are costing many human lives. History of Aircraft Automation According to Kingsley (2006), automation of airplanes was initially inspired by the crisis in oil prices, which rocked the global economy in the 1970s. The acute jet fuel price increment prompted airplane manufacturers to start rethinking the cockpit design. The producers sought to design a fuel efficient replacement for the extant Boeing 727 and the A300 aircraft. It is, therefore, the subsequent class of A320 airplanes manufactured by Airbus Industries that had integral automation and sophisticated computer technology systems. The A300 was the most sophisticated aircraft at the time, since it incorporated a contemporary computer suite and modern avionics. Further, Airbus Industries incorporated advanced specifications like the flight control system popularly referred to as fly-by-wire, center of gravity control and other composite basis structures. The electronic flight instrument system (EFIS) environment or essentially, the glass cockpit is considered to be the revolutionary and most evident change to commercial aircraft. These radical changes made it possible to cut fuel consumption of aircraft by half, thus meeting the objective of enhanced fuel efficiency. With time, analog gauges associated with old aircraft were, and continue to be, increasingly replaced by that grew up with the airplane and became standardized are rapidly being substituted with computerized displays, which offer more information and have higher reliability and accuracy. All these changes were also meant to lower pilots’ physical and mental workload and reduce maintenance needs due to enhanced reliability. Most of the conventional analogue systems in aircraft have either been assimilated into the new digitized versions or replaced entirely. Overreliance on Automation According to Wiegmann, Rich & Zhang, (2001), it is evident that automation is making pilots less perceptive. Parasuraman & Byrne, (2003) noted that pilots who are working with high levels of automation in autopilot are prone to lose track of their location. This means that if there is an unexpected engine failure, any other issue that would prompt them to have an emergency landing, then the pilot would be late to act. This is normally known as the man-out-of-the-loop performance issue. According to (Lee, & See, 2004), the out-of-the-loop performance issue has become one of the principal probable consequences that is caused by automation. This means that the automated systems operators are left handicapped the capability of taking over usi9ng manual operations in case there is an automation failure. Pilots that are used to overlying on autopilot have been found to have diminished capability for detecting system errors as well as performing manual tasks when automation failures occur. This means that compared to pilots who perform tasks manually, they are prone to cause more accidents (Endsley, Bolté & Jones, 2003). Additionally, there are other numerous potential dangers which can take place because of overreliance of automation systems. For instance, a pilot can misunderstand an error or fail to comprehend unconventional automation behavior. This may ultimately cause an accident since the pilot failed to understand the diverse ways that the automation system is supposed to act especially when it is failing. Therefore, the confusion that can be brought about by lack of knowledge when dealing with the automated systems failure can lead to fatal accidents. Additionally, it might be difficult for a pilot that is used to using the automated system to trace the source of the problem Trust in automation may occur to have a huge influence over detecting any kind of malfunction in the system. However, study conducted by Kingsley (2006) has proven that many of the pilots who have a high level of trust in the automated systems are likely to start omitting imperative tasks which should be conducted manually. This means that the pilots skills are being affected negatively and this might lead to acute overlook of imperative information situations. it is also evident that overreliance on automated systems reduces the pilots situational awareness. This is because if a pilot is more focused on the automated systems, there is a chance that one can misperceive the essential instruments and rarely look at them. This means that there a chance that a pilot may misinterpret important data. Highly reliable systems can also make pilots passive thus less likely to keep watch over the systems. This means that there is a chance that the pilot will not notice when the system has failed or that the system is not working properly. A pilot that is not over reliant with the automated system should be able to interact with the system and make necessary adjustments in case of any form of failure (Endsley, Bolté & Jones, 2003). Automation Issues Essentially, pilots’ overreliance on automation is associated with numerous issues discussed in further details herein. Understanding Automated systems are essential to piloting but some of the pilots may fail to comprehend the structure as well as the function of automation systems to efficiently perform their duties. This means that despite the fact that they over rely on the automated system, some of the essential knowledge that they are supposed to help them in times of crisis is incompatible with the system (Funk et al., 2000). Complacency Pilots are prone to become complacent because automated systems make them overly confidents in systems management. This ultimately leads to failure of exercising vigilance and sometimes they abdicate responsibility (Funk et al., 2000). Inappropriate utilization: In some cases, overreliance in automation systems increases the level of laziness in pilots. This means that the pilots end up using the automated systems in areas where they should not be applied. This means that, there is a high chance of causing unnecessary accidents if care is not taken (Funk et al., 2000). Unexpected Events Sometimes the automated system can perform in ways that are not intended or expected. This means that some of these vents might be inexplicable to the pilots and may create unnecessary confusion. Therefore, instead of the automated system making the work easier, it ends up increasing the pilot’s workload and may lead to risky conditions (Funk et al., 2000). Dissemination Information In some cases, the automation system might fail to display imperative information hence limit the pilots’ ability to make appropriate decisions. This because; the pilot is used assuming that the system will automatically debug itself (Funk et al., 2000). Reduced skill Pilots usually lose the cognitive as well as their psychomotor skills which are essential for manual flying. This means that extensive utilizations of the automated systems may cause inactiveness that is needed to fly non automated airplanes (Funk et al., 2000). Effects of Overreliance on Automation Owing to the exponential use of technology in the aviation industry, there clearly are numerous adverse human issues that parallel this evolution to a heightened level of automation and sophistication. Research shows that increased use of computerized systems, like the flight management computers (FMCs), on flight decks has led to pilots spending more time relaxing even during crucial stages of the flight. This is a primary contributor to distractions that ultimately lead to accidents. In the traditional setting, analogue systems required keen attention of pilots and the mistakes made were minute, with potentially little effect on the operation of aircraft. This is no longer the case with modern airplanes, since the system is extensively synchronized and a slight mistake has a high likelihood of triggering a catastrophic accident. Therefore, although automation eases the flying process, it also poses a greater risk, especially if the human operator does not adequately play his or her role. An excellent example of the sensitivity of an automated flight system is the utilization of diminished propeller force in the modern setting. While reducing thrust force for take-off is beneficial in reduction of jet engines’ wear and tear, it requires keen attention while inputting the proper temperature into the FMCs. Therefore, if a pilot is distracted or trusts that the computers will automatically detect the correct temperature, a disaster would be imminent since the aircraft would fail to accelerate as required during take-off. This example adequately highlights the unreliability of the fundamental computer-human dynamic. Otherwise stated, the efficiency of technology is only as strong as the pilot and if the latter does not use automated systems appropriately, then accidents will continue to occur. Research on pilots’ perceptions conducted by Naidoo (2008) using automation attitude questionnaires (AAQ) revealed that pilots also think that there are issues associated with overdependence on aircraft automation. For instance, some respondents upheld the belief that although new technology-based flight equipment is safer to manage and operate than traditional equipment, it could make pilots lose fundamental flying skills. This is a possibility attributable to the lack of active flying skills. Another negative aspect of complicated automation is that the higher the sophistication, the higher the flying stress when the system fails. This reversion from highly helpful and accurate to completely ineffectual is very risky, especially if a pilot does not have basic flight skills. There is an implication that, if the automated system fails to work, pilots that over depend on it do not have the sense and handling skills to deal with the dire situation. Ultimately, the airplane would crash since such pilots can only operate automated systems. In further research by Funk et al. (2000) respondents noted that relying excessively on automated systems makes pilots complacent. This implies that pilots can undermine their training and fail to fully apply the appropriate standard operating procedure (SOP) for different situations. As a result, the pilots may end up making mistakes while flying or they could fail to acknowledge the gravity of emergency situations. The main point that can be discerned from this assertion is that automation cannot be relied upon to replace flying experience; instead it should solely serve to augment a pilot’s skills and experience. Pilots’ overdependence on automation may also inhibit rational decision making, especially if the system turns out to be erroneously set. For instance, there are incidences in which airplanes have been reported to veer off from their flight path and venture into foreign or unauthorized airspace. This is because pilots simply follow the inputted flight directions and coordinates on the FMC, without consistently checking the flight progress manually. With a high and rising number of airplanes, as well as, an increasingly crowded airspace, overreliance on automation in consideration of such aspects may lead to plane collisions and other potentially disastrous incidents (Jian, Bisantz & Drury, 2000). According to Naidoo (2008), the overreliance on automated flight systems may also lower pilots’ self-confidence. This implies that pilots could be trained to apply fundamental flying skills, but they cannot, since they feel that the automated system presents the safest and most effective flying approach. Further, novice pilots could have been taught to trust the automated flight instruments than their active flying skills acquired during training. Such pilots tend to perform as they were told; an aspect that further negates their self-confidence and actual ability to fly. This means that even when they are faced with a life threatening situation, they are not confident enough to apply their skills and avert the disaster. This serves as yet another example of how over dependence on automation impedes pilots’ flying ability and consequently predisposes the lives of passengers and the flight crew to immense danger. Case studies Overdependence of pilots on automated systems has contributed to numerous accidents in the world today. Some of these cases are discussed hereunder. Asiana jetliner Case The pilots in this flight did not realize that they were flying too low. This is because they entrusted the automated system and did not bother looking outside to make the judgment call thus the disaster. The Boeing 777 missed the runway and hit a seawall killing two passengers and injuring others. The pilots were unable to recover from automated operations and operate the airplane manually. This means that their overdependence on the automated system was the main cause of the accident. After thorough investigations, the flight data revealed numerous manual handling errors thus the pilots were accused of overreliance of the automated system (Bosker, 2003). Turkish Airlines B737 Case The accident that took place in Amsterdam in 2009 was an eye opener on the over dependence of autopilot and the need to improve manual flying skills. In this case the crew allowed the airplane to stall during the landing procedure. The airplane crashed killing five passengers and four crew members while one hundred and seventeen passengers were injured. Investigations show that there was an erroneous altitude reading which did not record as an error. The pilots were unaware of this due to overreliance on automated systems and since they did not have detailed information that could allow them detect the errors, they ended up crashing (DSB, 2009). Research Being Conducted To Deal with Pilot Technology Dependency After numerous accidents have taken place due to pilots technology dependency the FFA has commissioned a study that tried to come up with solutions to the issue. The study showed that many pilots lacked sufficient skills and in-depth knowledge on properly controlling airplane trajectory. This is because of the immense reliance of automated systems. Additionally, it is evident that the rapid changing technology especially for automated systems also contributes highly to these accidents. Therefore the FAA is trying to come up with training programs where pilots will be able to learn the basic of flying especially using manual systems. Recommendations Initial training should include both the modern and non automated aspects found in a cockpit. This will help the pilots to be more confident in transitioning to manual flight mode easily with a lot of confidence. Therefore, pilots should be allowed to train adequately on how to control an airplane manually without relying fully on automated systems since they are prone to fail. Airlines should focus on training their pilots on head up airmanship skills. This means that the pilots should have essential knowledge on how to deal with unexpected failure of the automated system. This is because there might be no time to punch in the correct buttons to autocorrect the system. Therefore, it is imperative to have the pilots learn how to transit form an automated system to a manual system. Basic training should entail the use of display instruments for both automated and manual system. This will help the pilots to be more perceptive when dealing with primary navigation systems and to be able to notice errors easily. This will reduce complacency since pilots will be aware of basic data instruments enabling the pilots to have adequate skills to handle manual flying systems. Simulators should be part pilots’ basic training. This will make sure that all pilots are tested in both automated and manual scenarios especially when a system malfunction has taken place, this will assist in improving the pilots skills especially when dealing with an acute issue regarding manual flying. These simulations should be done non-punitive atmosphere so as to foster optimistic perception of the pilot especially in manual flying skills. Conclusion The overall discussion traces flight automation to its advent in the later part of the 19th century and examines its tremendous growth in the contemporary society. Further, cases of recent airplane accidents clearly underscore the detrimental effects of pilots’ excessive reliance on automated flight systems. It is rather worrying that, although computers and computerized machines are not adequately advanced to replace humans in complex situations like flying, pilots are increasingly becoming worse at functioning without them. When crises strike and automated systems cannot resolve the issues, pilots are left operating with judgment and skills that have been extensively eroded by overreliance on automation. To curb this dangerous trend and avert flying accidents, it is imperative for flight crews to undergo intensive training on how to stay mentally engaged and ready to use basic flight or pilot skills when the situation warrants it. References Bosker, B. (2003). Automation Addiction' And The Asiana Crash: What Happens When We Trust Computers Too Much? Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/11/automation-addiction_asiana-crash_n_3576059.html Dutch Safety Board (DSB). (2009). Crashed during approach, Boeing 737-800, Amsterdam Schiphol AIrport. Retrieved http://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/en/onderzoek/1748/crashed-during-approach-boeing-737-800-amsterdam-schiphol-airport/fase/1475/dutch-safety-board-issues-preliminary-report-crash-turkish-airlines#fasen Endsley, R., Bolté, B., & Jones, G. (2003). Designing for Situation Awareness: An Approach to User Centered Design. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis. Funk, K. et al. (2000). Flight Deck Automation Issues. The international Journal of Aviation Psychology, 9(2), 102-123. Jian, J., Bisantz, M., & Drury, G., (2000). Foundations for an empirically determined scale of trust in automated systems. International Journal of Cognitive Ergonomics, 4 (1), 53-71. Kingsley, M. (2006). Airbus Rethinks Plans to Put Winglets on the A320. Flight International Magazine. October (15-19). Lee, D., & See, A. (2004). Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human Factors, 46, 50-58. Naidoo, P. (2008). Airline Pilots’ Perceptions of Advanced Flight Deck Automation. Retrieved from http://upetd.up.ac.za/thesis/available/etd-06152009-133747/unrestricted/dissertation.pdf Parasuraman, R., & Byrne,A. (2003). Automation and human performance in aviation. In Tsang, P. S. & Vidulich, M. A. (Eds.), Principles and practice of aviation psychology (pp. 311-356). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Wiegmann, A., Rich, A., & Zhang, H. (2001). Automated diagnostic aids: the effects of aid reliability on users’ trust and reliance. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science 2(4), 352-367. Read More