Archive for the ‘Automation Resource Management’ Category
Boundaries and Centers
I am reading Asaf Degani’s book Taming HAL, a discussion of human interaction with automation. One thing I have observed is that the foundation of a good safety management system is clear, defined boundaries of operating envelopes. Our body and our aircraft have limits, and while we can perform at the edges of these limits, doing so effectively removes any margin for error (envelope protection). Aviation is a dynamic, complex environment subject to multiple influences, but the system is designed to handle one change at a time. It is not designed to handle compound emergencies, and automation does not have the creative problem-solving skills that we possess. Automation is great at doing one thing, don’t ask it to do two, and don’t push it past the edge.
So let’s think about it before we go. Takeoffs are optional, landings are not. Operating away from a safe center begins to strip away defenses and leave no room for human or machine to recover. Let’s be sure we fully understand our capabilities and limitations (our machine’s too) and operate conservatively.
Fly Smart
Kent
FSF Basic Guide to Human Factors
From the FSF Basic Guide to Human Factors, a quick recap on development of CRM…
“CRM has been used with in the aviation industry for more than 20 years undergoing several evolutions.
1st evolution: emphasized changing individual styles and correcting deficiencies in individual behavior with a heavy focus on psychological testing.
2nd evolution: represented a focus on cockpit group dynamics, was more modular, and dealt more with specific aviation concepts related to flight operations.
3rd evolution: came a broadening of scope, specifically, training began to take into account the characteristics of aviation systems in which crew must function and expanded to areas out side the cockpit (e.g., cabin crews, maintenance personnel),
4th evolution: came integrating and proceduralization.
5th evolution: represents an awareness that human error is inevitable and can provide a great deal of information (Bowers et al., 2001). “CRM is now being used as a way to try to manage these errors by focusing on training teamwork skills that will promote (a) error avoidance, (b) early detection of errors, (c) minimization of consequences resulting from CRM errors. Programs are beginning to go beyond error management to include a focus on threat recognition and management. (Bowers et al., 2001, p. 642).”
FSF Basic Guide to HF developed by Curt Lewis (no relation) and Sylvia Hughes.
Threat and Error Management is the latest generation. There are also some interestng comments on perception, memory and mental models. New systems will need to consider not only shared mental models of humans, but also the interface with the next advancements in automation.
Threat and Error Management in a Nutshell
The Threat and Error Management Model was developed by Dr Bob Helmreich and the UT Human Factors Project and is the 6th Generation of CRM
Here’s the model in a nutshell…
THREAT MANAGEMENT
Focused on future events
Threats
-Operational factors-Aircrew, supervisory, maintenance, ATC,…
-Environmental factors-Turbulence, low vis, ice, rain, night time…
Operational and Environmental factors are managed through proper planning at…
-Strategic Level-Flight Ops Manual, OpSpecs, Aircraft Manuals, Training
-Tactical Level-Contingency options, Resource Management
Effective communication is key, before, during and after event
ERROR MANAGEMENT
Focused on current and past events
First Goal: Avoid
-Develop plan
-Communicate
-Execute
Second Goal: Manage
-Identify
-Manage workload
-Maintain Situational Awareness & Assessment
Third Goal: Mitigate
-Limit adverse consequences
MONITOR & CROSS-CHECK
Monitor
Comparing actual flight path and system performance to
intended path and performance
Cross-Check
Ensure actions result in desired outcome
GOAL
Error avoidance – Detection – Mitigation
One tool to use = “CAMI”
Confirm automation input
Activate system
Monitor performance
Intervene to prevent undesired states
TEM is the next generation of Team Resource Management
Here is a TEMM ppt prepared by the UTHFRP with two case studies.
Fly Smart
Clark
Automation Monitoring
The more things change, the more they stay the same. Here is a NASA Callback written 10 years ago, addressing human-machine interface issues associated with flight deck automation. This call back addresses the proactive nature of monitoring duties vs reactive connotation of Pilot Not Flying.
Callback 219
Monitor and Cross Check Strategies for General Aviation
Monitor and Cross Check Strategies for General Aviation
Here is a presentation I put together for the FAASTeam. The subject matter addresses challenges associated with automation resource management.
Fly Smart
Clark
Signal Charlie 