Human Error in Aviation
Human error has documented as a primary for more then 70% of commercial airplane accidents. These errors come from all facets in the aviation industry to include pilots during flight operations, mechanics engaging in bad maintenance practices, and air traffic management. Human error is used more and more because it is an increasing problem in the aircraft mishaps. Actual aircraft failure due to mechanical issues are a rare occurrence and could have been prevented with better practices. The instruments are only as good as the operators. Recently, their have been many advances in technology and software that can autonomously go through flight operations with the pilot having less and less responsibility. These technological upgrades are being made to prevent human error and making a safer flight experience for the industry and its customers.
Reducing error in airline maintenance is a challenge that the airline industry faces daily. All the technology and advanced equipment is useless unless if a mechanic install the equipment improperly. We can say if a mechanic installed a certain piece of equipment by the exact details of an instruction manual then we wouldn't have any issues but ensuring it is done right can be an issue when improper practices are used. We can have a particular prevention strategy in place to reduce error saying "If a mechanic would have performed X action, then an event wouldn't have occurred," but human error is always a factor to consider.
References
Johnson, William, B. (2000). Reducing Installation Error in Airline Maintenance. Federal Aviation Administration.
Alan,
ReplyDeleteYou said it perfectly, "the instruments are only as good as the operator."
It's crazy to think that such a vast majority of accidents could so easily be avoided. However, do you really think that the implementation of more and more self governing and autonomist technology would help this problem? I'm not saying that reducing the workload for the operator and mechanic would be a horrible thing, but at what point do we go from truly learning our trait to merely just learning/relying on the software that performs the task for us? In a way I see it as a double edge sword that can both prevent certain operator induced human factors, such as minor automatic corrective inputs so the pilot doesn't have to fight every force on the plane, while at the same time maybe adding more negative feedback; like skill level compromise and complacency. What are your thoughts on this?
Thank you Alan for the information and hope you have a good day.
- Javi
Hey Alan,
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with you saying the the instruments are only as good as the operator. Today the instruments and technology on our aircraft have come a long way and are considered very safe. This is done through more autonomy and more complex systems.
In addition I think the the autonomy makes the operator more apathetic. When monitoring instruments such as the autopilot instead of actually flying, the pilots can miss important indications during flight. it is very important that the pilots stay focused and alert at all times.
Understanding how the systems work is also a very important factor, the more complex the systems are, the more room for error. I think more understanding of the importance of human factors with ADM and CRM training can reduce accidents and promote safety in the industry.
I could not agree more with your post.
have a great day!
- Yitav