Meeting Reports

Work and Role of the Airline Pilot

“To modernize training we need to start with the end in mind. What is the airline pilot’s actual work? What do they do that results in good outcomes?” The contribution of Dr. Barbara Holder, Lead Scientist of the Flight Deck Concept Center at Boeing was entitled The Good Pilot. She reported on ethnographic fieldwork done by Boeing at 16 operators across Europe, Asia, Oceania, and North and South America in order to better understand 1) the system in which airline pilots work, and 2) what “good” pilot performance is, given the aviation system. Observed were cockpit crews in their real world of line operations. Also observed were all aspects of recurrent training. Interviews were conducted with captains, first officers, management pilots, and instructors/evaluators. Airline Operation Centers were observed in their practices regarding flight planning, weather, scheduling, briefings, and maintenance.

Not new, but good to hear again: airline pilots have three main tasks:

• –
  Fly the Airplane (flight path and energy management, use of aircraft systems, airplane configuration, communicate with ATC);
• –
  Manage Expected Variability (pre- and in-flight planning; manage operational pressure and workload; assess risks; manage threat and error; manage the crew; represent the airline; self-assess for fatigue, fitness to fly and proficiency; and
• –
  Manage Unexpected Variability (recognizing and responding to non-normal and unexpected situations, non-routine decision making, crisis management).

In short:

When examining the aviation system itself: it has grown a very complex socio-technological system indeed. An airplane itself is a system of systems (including the design and all advanced technology) and every flight is taking place in/part of a much larger system of competing and cooperating airlines, complex airspace structure and procedures, airport infrastructure, legislation, airline policies, national and international policy, and more.

Automation

Flight deck automation has changed the work of the airline pilot for once and for all. It all started with the automation of aircraft control (autopilot/autothrottle). Next came the automation of information (Primary Flight Display, NAV display, intelligent alerts and alarms, engine indications, crew alerting system) and then came the automation of flight management (Flight Management System). As a consequence complexity on the flight deck increased and direct pilot control of the aircraft decreased. Prof. Dietrich Manzey from Technical University Berlin showed us the still very worthwhile picture of the development of flight deck automation by Billings (1997). He then discussed the vulnerabilities in the use of automation, some of which are already “old buddies”: sometimes too much reliance on automated systems and reluctance to intervene, lack of mode awareness, confusion errors, FMS programming and usage errors (see FAA, 2013). A relatively new generation of vulnerabilities, revealed by accidents like that of THY 1591 (2009), AF447 (2009), and Asiana 214 (2013) are control automation induced loss of flying skills and the challenges associated with automation-manual transition. Basic manual and cognitive flying skills tend to decline because of lack of practice. Unanticipated situations requiring to manually override automation are often difficult to understand and handle, and may create a surprise or startle effect causing extra workload and stress.All three mentioned accidents revealed crews having problems with: knowledge and skills for (transition to) manual flight; understanding the automation; the timely recognition and recovery of the airplane stalling or being in an unusual attitude; the right control inputs; energy management; and crew coordination related to aircraft control.

Manual Flight Operations

Independently of each other and in more or less the same way, both Harry Nelson, Test Pilot at AIRBUS, and A320/319 Captain Michael Gillen of United Airlines asked the pilots in the audience: “If you had an issue in cruise and lost all speed data, what pitch and power setting will keep the aircraft flying?”

Gillen:

The problem seems also to be linked to a new generation of pilots with less manual flight training from the beginning. Pilots entering airline service today have training and experience backgrounds very different from those of earlier generations. Harry Nelson summarized the stereotypical backgrounds of the earlier generations of airline pilots versus the “Children of the Magenta” nicely at follows:

• –
  Military/Civil background vs. All civil background,
• –
  High manual skills vs. High automation skills,
• –
  Experienced pilots vs. new hires,
• –
  Flight path=Attitude+Power vs. Flight path=Flight Director+Auto Pilot/Thrust,
• –
  Fear and respect of risk vs. confidence in data, and
• –
  Suspicion of automatic systems vs. lack of confidence in manual reversion.

Dr. Kathy Abbott (FAA’s Chief Scientific and Technical Advisor) reported that over 60% of accidents reviewed by the FAA Flight Deck Automation Working Group had manual handling errors as a factor (Operational Use of Flight Path Management Systems, PARC, FAA, 2013). Also LOSA data shows an increase in manual mismanagement, especially speed management on descent. Manual flight operations are not just motor skills (“stick and rudder”) but many cognitive skills (e.g., procedural) are involved as well. Degradation of manual flight knowledge and skills is due to lack of practice. Dr. Immanuel Barshi, Research Scientist at NASA Ames Research Center put it like this:

Related Topics

Very interesting presentations, but not reviewed in detail here, were also given by Prof. Graham Braithwaite from Cranfield University about accident investigations and blaming (“Seek out every opportunity to learn, don’t drown in the data”), Captain Andreas Meyer, ICAO, about Safety Management Systems (“SMS’s cannot eliminate risk, are largely influenced by human and societal elements, need to be adapted to the organization, require educating people”), Dr. Terry von Thaden from the University of Illinois, about the effects of fatigue on safety related behavior (“Fatigue is not simply an individual professional problem, we can empirically find systemic relations between culture, policy and fatigue”), and Dr. Jürgen Graf from Klinikum Stuttgart about CRM in Medicine (“Rigorous integration of human factors in physician’s training will facilitate end results in medicine”).

Future Training

Captain Chesley Sullenberger, retired US Airways captain now, was an experienced and competent pilot and measured by his “confident humility” (as Lufthansa Captain Robert Schröder characterized Sullenberger’s leadership, see Figure 2) seemed to have the right personality and attitude for the job. His decision to make an emergency landing on Hudson river, and the successful manual execution of it, thus saving UA Flight 1549 with 155 passengers and crew from disaster, may serve as examples of what we expect from “the good pilot”.

Airlines are looking for pilots possessing resilience and ‘true competence’, and true competence includes wisdom. Harry Nelson:

That is, if we don’t train them properly. Aviation has been caught out by the rate of change in technology and data availability, but aircraft programs (e.g., B747, B737, A320, and A320 NEO) live longer now (maybe for even a century!) and Nelson is not foreseeing major ‘game changing’ technology, in particular regarding automation before the 5^th generation. So we have opportunity to answer some important questions.

Can we speed up the acquisition of experience for the younger and new generations of airline pilots? In order to achieve that we should find ways of providing real exposure to them. For a start, training objectives should be defined from the understanding of good pilot performance from a systems perspective (cf. Holder), and one of the main objectives will always be ‘safe trajectory and energy level’(cf. Nelson, Abbott). With regard to the content of future training: define the future manual skill set, e.g., upset recovery training and high altitude manual flight training (cf. Nelson, Manzey) and train the management of automation surprises, stress management, decision making and leadership (cf. Manzey). With regard to training programs and methods: use virtual reality training and simulations of accident situations (cf. Gillen), use the Comprehensive LOFT (cf. Barshi), use more flexible training syllabi, provide more manual flying experience during normal flight operations (cf. Manzey), provide training when needed and not at rigid intervals, use modern theories of human performance and learning, use realistic but flexible training scenarios (cf. Holder). With regard to quality instruction: instructors should be trained teachers, standardized and calibrated (cf. Holder). With regard to the system as a whole: simplify procedures! (cf. Schröder), adapt company policies with view to hand flying (cf. Gillen), secure training budget and recognize the safety and operational value it generates (cf. Nelson, Holder).

Finally, don’t forget training should be fun! It should be focused on career-long learning. So, all along the Pilot Lifecycle Training, allow for more training time and less checking time, allow for testing new ideas, and allow for getting it wrong sometimes.

Thanks to Martin Egerth and crew, it was an inspiring conference and real fun joining in and meeting people!

For more information on this as well as on the forthcoming conference, please view http://www.human-factors-conference.com/conference/.

Target Audience

The summer school has two main target groups: aviation professionals and students. For professionals from the aviation sector such as human factors specialists, psychologists, pilots, air traffic controllers, cabin crew, maintenance staff, ISAP serves as an opportunity to deepen their knowledge on aviation-related subjects. The exchange between aviation specialists conducting scientific research and practitioners in the aviation industry enables both to combine current research and scientific theories with practice, from which both parties can benefit. Furthermore, ISAP appeals specifically to university students, making it unique amongst aviation psychology events. The summer school is an affordable option for international undergraduate, graduate and PhD students who strive to educate themselves and deepen their competency in different areas of aviation psychology and human factors with the help of highly qualified professionals. The exchange between aviation professionals and students can also serve for both as a professional networking opportunity. Moreover, the attendance of ISAP’15 is recognized by EAAP as a course qualifying for accreditation such as “Junior Aviation Psychologist”, “Aviation Psychologist”, or “Human Factors Specialist”.

ISAP’15 had 111 participants. The summer school truly earned the title of an international event as there were participants from 23 different countries worldwide, including the USA, Canada, countries in the Middle East and all across Europe. This year there was also a change in the marketing strategy towards students with the intention to increase the student quota at ISAP. This was organized by a student team personally reaching out to their fellow students at the University of Graz but also through social networking platforms such as LinkedIn and Facebook. The new strategy was successful as there were 35 students in attendance (32% of all participants).

ISAP’15 Highlights

A highlight at ISAP’15 was the well-received Ashgate bookstand where participants were offered books on aviation psychology and human factors for a 50% discount. ISAP’15 has a longstanding collaboration with Ashgate Publishing and was particularly happy to welcome Luigi Fort for the first time personally in Graz who helped participants select the right books for their aviation career. Special thanks also go to Billy Thompson of NeuroStat Analytical Solutions who generously offered a sponsorship for students to attend ISAP’15. The sponsorship covered reimbursement of travel and hotel expenses, as well as participation and other course fees for three students. ISAP’15 and Neurostat Solutions would like to congratulate Clara Haratani (University of Graz, Austria), Eduardo Rosa (Umeå University, Sweden), and Alexander Simon Seifert (University of Salzburg, Austria) again for impressing the selection committee with their motivational letters and applications in order to receive the sponsorship.

ISAP consisted of morning sessions that were kicked off with a keynote presentation every day, after which participants could choose between two parallel tracks with theoretical lectures in the morning and practical workshops in the afternoon, held by renowned aviation professionals. Besides the coffee and lunch breaks, the ISAP’15 student team organized attractive evening programs including restaurant visits and an official reception at the town hall of Graz, which participants greatly appreciated.

Scientific Program

As customary at ISAP, several different aviation-related topics were discussed during the course of the week. On the first day, the focus was on Crew Resource Management (CRM) and Safety Culture. Nicklas Dahlström (Emirates Airlines) opened the week with his keynote address on the story and state of CRM and then further delved into the topic in his afternoon workshops by discussing the way forward for CRM, where he assessed the participants’ opinions by live online voting. The lecture on safety culture and systems thinking was held by Steven Shorrock (EUROCONTROL), at which he discussed emerging trends in the theory of safety culture (e.g., Safety I vs. Safety II) and explored the value of the safety culture concept in practice. Afterwards participants had the opportunity to learn about the application of systems thinking to safety at the workshop led by Steven Shorrock (EUROCONTROL) and Michaela Schwarz (Austro Control), see Figure 1.

On Day 2 attendees were introduced to the basics of spatial disorientation (SD) in aviation and to specific SD-related challenges pilots face while flying. Bob Cheung (University of Toronto) argued that pilots should be provided with skills to anticipate spatial disorientation and should be educated on ways to recover from SD. In a follow-up lecture, Mr. Cheung also presented practical recommendations and possible countermeasures to SD. Eric Groen (TNO) tied his presentation in with Mr. Cheung’s. After giving information on Controlled Flight into Terrain (CFIT) and Loss-of-Control In-Flight (LOCI), two major causes of fatal aviation accidents, he introduced the participants to simulator technologies that facilitate the familiarization of pilots with these conditions and possible ways of prevention and recovery. In the parallel session, Carl-Herbert Rokitansky (University of Salzburg) introduced the audience to top performance systems, including a live demonstration of intelligent airport operations (see Figure 2).

The second day was concluded by a scientific poster session, where presenters promoted their posters in a 2-minute slot. Participants then had the opportunity to study the posters more closely, challenge poster presenters on their research and then vote for their favorite. The winner of the best poster award and a £150 book voucher from Ashgate Publishing was Alexander Simon Seifert with his research poster on “Introduction of the Questionnaire for the Measurement of Change Loyalty (QMLC)” (see Figure 3).

The keynote speaker on the third day was Jeffrey T. Mitchell from the International Critical Incident Stress Foundation (ICISF). In his presentation on Critical Incident Stress Management (CISM) he introduced attendees to the principles and core elements of CISM while providing numerous real-life examples from his own extensive experience in CISM. The afternoon lectures and workshops were dedicated to Human Reliability Management (Oliver Sträter, University of Kassel) and selection methods (Billy Thompson, Neurostat Analytical Solutions). Furthermore, some selected participants had the chance to test their flying skills with Reinhard Braunstingl and Ioana Koglbauer in the flight simulator at the Technical University of Graz, where they learned about combined mental and flight simulator training.

On Days 4 and 5, a selected group of ISAP participants attended the Individual Crisis Intervention Course by Jeffrey Mitchell and Karl Richstein (Mayday Foundation), where they expanded their knowledge on CISM, while also developing practical skills with hands-on exercises and critical incident role plays (see Figure 4). The participants received a certificate on the completion of the basic CISM course.

On the 4^th day the participants had the opportunity to attend Nancy Leveson’s (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) stimulating keynote address on system thinking applied to human-machine systems. She presented STAMP, a new model of accident causality based on systems theory and talked about the confusion between safety and reliability. She argued that in order to make progress in accident prevention, the ability to perform integrated human-system design should be enhanced and therefore ideally human factors experts and aeronautical engineers should work together. Neville Stanton from the University of Southampton held the second keynote lecture of the day, on the application of human factors methods in aviation. In the afternoon session, Hans-Jörg Lotter (InfoWERK) presented fundamental personal and social competencies in aviation and the prerequisites for robust and reliable systems. Interested participants could then attend a session on possibilities of telemonitoring for pilots and learn how information- and communication technology can assist psychological coaching and treatment (e.g., in stress situations). This was presented by Anton Dunzendorfer and Christian Czihak from the Austrian Institute of Technology.

Day 5 started with a panel discussion titled “From Mental Training Skills to Mental Health”, led by Robert Bor (Dynamic Change Consultants Ltd.). Later Wolfgang Kallus (University of Graz) and pilot Christoph Gruber discussed how mental training of athletes could be transferred to pilots (e.g., mental visualising of recovery from unusual attitudes to prevent the risk of panic, management of stress and anxiety in emergency situations). The parallel session was dedicated to fear of flying, presented by Lucas van Gerwen of the VALK Foundation. In two sessions he introduced the audience to different psychological complaints of passengers, cabin and cockpit crew and possible therapeutical interventions. The scientific program at ISAP’15 concluded with Trang Dao’s (Santa Cabrini Hospital) workshop on aviation mental health, where she presented an overview of detection tools, referral pathway and possible management models.

EAAP Students at ISAP

ISAP’15 was also the venue of the second EAAP Students meeting. The EAAP Students group was founded during the 31^st EAAP conference in Malta in 2014 and aims to facilitate networking amongst international students interested in aviation psychology and to enable mutual exchange of knowledge and information to successfully start a career in aviation. The meeting was a big success and was attended by the student participants of ISAP’15 (see Figure 5).

At the end of the week, participants had the chance to give feedback through an anonymous evaluation form. We would like to thank all who gave us valuable feedback and we will strive to implement your suggestions until ISAP’17. On behalf of the organizing committee of the University of Graz and the Austrian Aviation Psychology Association, I would like to express my heartfelt thanks to all of the lecturers, sponsors, and participants for once again making the summer school such a success.

EAAP – 32^nd Conference of the European Association for Aviation Psychology, September 26–30, 2016, Cascais, Portugal

Michaela Schwarz

EAAP is promoting the study of psychology and the application of psychology and human factors in aviation to the end of continuous improvement of aviation safety and efficiency. The biannually organized EAAP conferences aim to bring together people working in the field of aviation psychology and human factors, either as researchers, teachers, practitioners or students, and to encourage them to share their latest findings and experience. Also people working in related fields, like aerospace medicine, and those with mere interest in aviation psychology are very welcome.

Key Topics and Themes

“Thinking, High and Low: Cognition and Decision Making in Aviation” will be the main theme for the EAAP32. How can we improve operational and managerial decision making in aviation? How can we improve our judgement and problem solving capabilities? What can psychological research tell us? What roles should design, selection, training and investigation play? What should we know about our personal biases and how to overcome them? What roles do fatigue, fitness and mental health play?

Specialized keynote speakers will introduce the theme. Professionals from universities, research institutions, airlines, air forces, air navigation service providers, airports, manufacturers, maintenance facilities, regulators, bureaus of air safety investigation, and any other players in the aviation system are invited to contribute by paper or poster. Master and PhD students of aviation psychology or human factors are most welcome to contribute as well.

Topics may be related to civil, military or general aviation and to selection, training, ergonomics, mental health, incident and accident investigation, organizational resilience and safety management. Abstracts for proposed papers or posters should be submitted online.

The conference is recognized by EAAP as an accredited course for the fulfillment of the requirements to become an EAAP-certified Aviation Psychologist, Human Factors Specialist in Aviation or Junior Aviation Psychologist.

For any further details about the program, venue, conference fees, registration and accommodation please visit the conference website.

Contact:

Michaela Schwarz

Secretary General EAAP

E-mail: secretarygeneral@eaap.net

Web http://conference.eaap.net/