通过设计最小化飞行员错误:试飞员是否做得足够好?

G. Singer
{"title":"通过设计最小化飞行员错误:试飞员是否做得足够好?","authors":"G. Singer","doi":"10.4324/9781315259482-12","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It has been well documented that about 70% of commercial aircraft accidents in the last 15 years were related to human error. The cockpit of an airliner is designed for the specific task of providing a safe and efficient interface with the operators, usually 2 pilots. Despite similar tasks performed by all crews, designs vary greatly among manufacturers and few standards exist for interface methods. Design decisions in commercial projects have always been made based on subjective statements of test pilots, and test pilots rely on the certification regulations, company design philosophy, and prior experience. The design is scrutinized in reviews, flight tests, and certification tests, and is formally approved before it is allowed to enter service. However, most accidents of late have occurred despite this process, which begs the question of whether test pilots have been doing a good enough job in contributing to cockpit design. This paper explores this question, describing the present process of approval used by many manufacturers, finds the deficiencies in this method, and focuses on the role of test pilots.","PeriodicalId":249145,"journal":{"name":"Human Factors and Aerospace Safety","volume":"90 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"MINIMISING PILOT ERROR BY DESIGN: ARE TEST PILOTS DOING A GOOD ENOUGH JOB?\",\"authors\":\"G. Singer\",\"doi\":\"10.4324/9781315259482-12\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It has been well documented that about 70% of commercial aircraft accidents in the last 15 years were related to human error. The cockpit of an airliner is designed for the specific task of providing a safe and efficient interface with the operators, usually 2 pilots. Despite similar tasks performed by all crews, designs vary greatly among manufacturers and few standards exist for interface methods. Design decisions in commercial projects have always been made based on subjective statements of test pilots, and test pilots rely on the certification regulations, company design philosophy, and prior experience. The design is scrutinized in reviews, flight tests, and certification tests, and is formally approved before it is allowed to enter service. However, most accidents of late have occurred despite this process, which begs the question of whether test pilots have been doing a good enough job in contributing to cockpit design. This paper explores this question, describing the present process of approval used by many manufacturers, finds the deficiencies in this method, and focuses on the role of test pilots.\",\"PeriodicalId\":249145,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human Factors and Aerospace Safety\",\"volume\":\"90 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human Factors and Aerospace Safety\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315259482-12\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Factors and Aerospace Safety","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315259482-12","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

有充分的证据表明,在过去15年里,大约70%的商用飞机事故与人为失误有关。飞机的驾驶舱是为特定任务而设计的,为操作员(通常是两名飞行员)提供安全有效的界面。尽管所有工作人员都执行类似的任务,但制造商之间的设计差异很大,并且很少有接口方法的标准。商业项目中的设计决策总是基于试飞员的主观陈述,试飞员依赖于认证法规、公司设计理念和先前的经验。该设计在评审、飞行测试和认证测试中经过仔细审查,并在允许进入服役之前得到正式批准。然而,最近的大多数事故都是在这个过程中发生的,这就引出了试飞员在驾驶舱设计方面是否做得足够好的问题。本文探讨了这个问题,描述了目前许多制造商使用的批准过程,发现了这种方法的不足之处,并重点讨论了试飞员的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
MINIMISING PILOT ERROR BY DESIGN: ARE TEST PILOTS DOING A GOOD ENOUGH JOB?
It has been well documented that about 70% of commercial aircraft accidents in the last 15 years were related to human error. The cockpit of an airliner is designed for the specific task of providing a safe and efficient interface with the operators, usually 2 pilots. Despite similar tasks performed by all crews, designs vary greatly among manufacturers and few standards exist for interface methods. Design decisions in commercial projects have always been made based on subjective statements of test pilots, and test pilots rely on the certification regulations, company design philosophy, and prior experience. The design is scrutinized in reviews, flight tests, and certification tests, and is formally approved before it is allowed to enter service. However, most accidents of late have occurred despite this process, which begs the question of whether test pilots have been doing a good enough job in contributing to cockpit design. This paper explores this question, describing the present process of approval used by many manufacturers, finds the deficiencies in this method, and focuses on the role of test pilots.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信