Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Accidents, Aviation/prevention & control”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

6 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1997

Team play with a powerful and independent agent: operational experiences and automation surprises on the Airbus A-320

Research and operational experience have shown that one of the major problems with pilot-automation interaction is a lack of mode awareness (i.e., the current and future status and behavior of the automation). As a result, pilots sometimes experience so-called automation surprises when the automation takes an unexpected action or fails to behave as anticipated. A lack of mode awareness and automation surprises can he viewed as symptoms of a mismatch between human and machine properties and capabilities. Changes in automation design can therefore he expected to affect the likelihood and nature of problems encountered by pilots. Previous studies have focused exclusively on early generation "glass cockpit" aircraft that were designed based on a similar automation philosophy. To find out whether similar difficulties with maintaining mode awareness are encountered on more advanced aircraft, a corpus of automation surprises was gathered from pilots of the Airbus A-320, an aircraft characterized by high levels of autonomy, authority, and complexity. To understand the underlying reasons for reported breakdowns in human-automation coordination, we also asked pilots about their monitoring strategies and their experiences with and attitude toward the unique design of flight controls on this aircraft.

NASA Discipline Space Human Factors↗
NASA NTRS2000

Collision in space

On June 25, 1997, the Russian supply spacecraft Progress 234 collided with the Mir space station, rupturing Mir's pressure hull, throwing it into an uncontrolled attitude drift, and nearly forcing evacuation of the station. Like many high-profile accidents, this collision was the consequence of a chain of events leading to the final piloting errors that were its immediate cause. The discussion in this article does not resolve the relative contributions of the actions and decisions in this chain. Neither does it suggest corrective measures, many of which are straightforward and have already been implemented by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the Russian Space Agency. Rather, its purpose is to identify the human factors that played a pervasive role in the incident. Workplace stress, fatigue, and sleep deprivation were identified by NASA as contributory factors in the Mir-Progress collision (Culbertson, 1997; NASA, forthcoming), but other contributing factors, such as requiring crew to perform difficult tasks for which their training is not current, could potentially become important factors in future situations.

Mir Project↗
NASA NTRS1999

The evolution of Crew Resource Management training in commercial aviation

In this study, we describe changes in the nature of Crew Resource Management (CRM) training in commercial aviation, including its shift from cockpit to crew resource management. Validation of the impact of CRM is discussed. Limitations of CRM, including lack of cross-cultural generality are considered. An overarching framework that stresses error management to increase acceptance of CRM concepts is presented. The error management approach defines behavioral strategies taught in CRM as error countermeasures that are employed to avoid error, to trap errors committed, and to mitigate the consequences of error.

Non-NASA Center↗
NASA NTRS1995

At the intersection of automation and culture

The crash of an automated passenger jet at Nagoya, Japan, in 1995, is used as an example of crew error in using automatic systems. Automation provides pilots with the ability to perform tasks in various ways. National culture is cited as a factor that affects how a pilot and crew interact with each other and equipment.

NASA Discipline Space Human Factors↗
NASA NTRS1991

Does CRM training work?

Formal cockpit resource management training in crew coordination concepts increases the percentage of crews rated as above average in performance and decreases the percentage of crews rated as below average.

NASA Discipline Space Human Factors↗
NASA NTRS2001

Autogenic Feedback Training Exercise and pilot performance: enhanced functioning under search-and-rescue flying conditions

Studies have shown that autonomous mode behavior is one cause of aircraft fatalities due to pilot error. In such cases, the pilot is in a high state of psychological and physiological arousal and tends to focus on one problem, while ignoring more critical information. This study examined the effect of training in physiological self-recognition and regulation, as a means of improving crew cockpit performance. Seventeen pilots were assigned to the treatment and control groups matched for accumulated flight hours. The treatment group contained 4 pilots from HC-130 Hercules aircraft and 4 HH-65 Dolphin helicopter pilots; the control group contained 3 pilots of HC-130s and 6 helicopter pilots. During an initial flight, physiological data were recorded on each crewmember and an instructor pilot rated individual crew performance. Eight crewmembers were then taught to regulate their own physiological response levels using Autogenic-Feedback Training Exercise (AFTE). The remaining participants received no training. During a second flight, treatment participants showed significant improvement in performance (rated by the same instructor pilot as in pretests) while controls did not improve. The results indicate that AFTE management of high states of physiological arousal may improve pilot performance during emergency flying conditions.

NASA Discipline Neuroscience↗