Objective Evaluation of the Somatogravic Illusion from Flight Data of an Airplane Accident

IF 1.8 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Safety Pub Date : 2022-12-14 DOI:10.3390/safety8040085
E. Groen, T. Clark, M. Houben, J. Bos, R. Mumaw
{"title":"Objective Evaluation of the Somatogravic Illusion from Flight Data of an Airplane Accident","authors":"E. Groen, T. Clark, M. Houben, J. Bos, R. Mumaw","doi":"10.3390/safety8040085","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"(1) Background: It is difficult for accident investigators to objectively determine whether spatial disorientation may have contributed to a fatal airplane accident. In this paper, we evaluate three methods to reconstruct the possible occurrence of the somatogravic illusion based on flight data recordings from an airplane accident. (2) Methods: The outputs of two vestibular models were compared with the “standard” method, which uses the unprocessed gravito-inertial acceleration (GIA). (3) Results: All three methods predicted that the changing orientation of the GIA would lead to a somatogravic illusion when no visual references were available. However, the methods were not able to explain the first pitch-down control input by the pilot flying, which may have been triggered by the inadvertent activation of the go-around mode and a corresponding pitch-up moment. Both vestibular models predicted a few seconds delay in the illusory tilt from GIA due to central processing and sensory integration. (4) Conclusions: While it is difficult to determine which method best predicted the somatogravic illusion perceived during the accident without data on the pilot’s pitch perception, both vestibular models go beyond the GIA analysis in taking into account validated vestibular dynamics, and they also account for other vestibular illusions. In that respect, accident investigators would benefit from a unified and validated vestibular model to better explain pilot actions in accidents related to spatial disorientation.","PeriodicalId":36827,"journal":{"name":"Safety","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Safety","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/safety8040085","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

(1) Background: It is difficult for accident investigators to objectively determine whether spatial disorientation may have contributed to a fatal airplane accident. In this paper, we evaluate three methods to reconstruct the possible occurrence of the somatogravic illusion based on flight data recordings from an airplane accident. (2) Methods: The outputs of two vestibular models were compared with the “standard” method, which uses the unprocessed gravito-inertial acceleration (GIA). (3) Results: All three methods predicted that the changing orientation of the GIA would lead to a somatogravic illusion when no visual references were available. However, the methods were not able to explain the first pitch-down control input by the pilot flying, which may have been triggered by the inadvertent activation of the go-around mode and a corresponding pitch-up moment. Both vestibular models predicted a few seconds delay in the illusory tilt from GIA due to central processing and sensory integration. (4) Conclusions: While it is difficult to determine which method best predicted the somatogravic illusion perceived during the accident without data on the pilot’s pitch perception, both vestibular models go beyond the GIA analysis in taking into account validated vestibular dynamics, and they also account for other vestibular illusions. In that respect, accident investigators would benefit from a unified and validated vestibular model to better explain pilot actions in accidents related to spatial disorientation.
从一起飞机事故的飞行数据中客观评价躯体重力错觉
(1) 背景:事故调查人员很难客观地确定空间定向障碍是否导致了致命的飞机事故。在本文中,我们评估了三种基于飞机事故飞行数据记录重建体感错觉可能发生的方法。(2) 方法:将两种前庭模型的输出与使用未处理的重力-惯性加速度(GIA)的“标准”方法进行比较。(3) 结果:这三种方法都预测,在没有视觉参考的情况下,GIA方向的变化会导致躯体重力错觉。然而,这些方法无法解释飞行员飞行时的第一次俯仰下降控制输入,这可能是由复飞模式的无意激活和相应的俯仰上升时刻触发的。两个前庭模型都预测,由于中央处理和感觉整合,GIA的虚幻倾斜会延迟几秒钟。(4) 结论:虽然在没有飞行员音高感知数据的情况下,很难确定哪种方法最能预测事故中感知到的躯体重力错觉,但两种前庭模型在考虑经验证的前庭动力学方面都超出了GIA分析的范围,它们还考虑了其他前庭错觉。在这方面,事故调查人员将受益于统一和验证的前庭模型,以更好地解释飞行员在与空间定向障碍有关的事故中的行为。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Safety
Safety Social Sciences-Safety Research
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
5.30%
发文量
71
审稿时长
7 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信