Cockpit crews

As technology progresses the safety of man-machine systems depends more and more on the quality of the human component (operator). This fact is very obvious in transportation, where the operator (driver) is formally and actually in control of his or her vehicle. In aviation, however, a strong trend towards software control of the aeroplane is already becoming dominant, forcing the operator (pilot) primarily into the role of supervisor or monitor of the automatic control system and into that of trouble-shooter in case of (technical) failure. In this respect a cockpit crew is facing the same situation as for instance a shift of operators in the central control room of a completely computerised chemical process plant. 

An example of air pollution in a confined space is the air in an airplane. The air in commercial airplanes contains reduced levels of oxygen, increased levels of carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, ozone, volatile organic compounds and particulate matter. These contaminants have led to cockpit crew, cabin crew, and passenger complaints of headache, fatigue, fever, and respiratory difficulties. Another example of confined space air pollution is the release of solvent fumes when interior walls of buildings with inadequate air circulation are painted. ... 

At the controls were two senior Air France pilots, both with unblemished records, and between them more than 21,000h of flying time. After years in command of Boeings, the captain was embracing this revolutionary design. Known as problems of cockpit crew interaction with automation or automation surprise, it is a scenario arising from the complexity of the computer control system coupled with a high cockpit workload. 

The section starts with a gronp of scholars from fonr different academic institutions in Switzerland who developed insight in coping by looking at adaptation. They state that one caimot assnme that crews trained in one type of scenario will automatically transfer the acqnired skills to another scenario. Adaptation is shown to pay off, since cockpit crews who chose adaptive task strategies showed higher technical performance in the experiment set up by this Swiss team. In addition, they show the implications and possibilities for training. 

How Cockpit Crews Successfully Cope with High Task Demands... 

Hypothesis 4 cockpit crews with more extensive planning demonstrate a higher degree of adaptation to situational demands. As expected, more planning goes along with significantly more complete adaptation to situational demands in both scenarios (r =. 36 . 25). 

Haeusler, R. (2006). Cockpit Crews auf Erfolgskurs - Eine videobasierte Analyse adaptiver Aufgabenstrategien in beanspmchenden Situationen (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Bern, Switzerland. 

Haeusler, R., Klampfer, B., Amacher, A. and Naef, W. (2004). Behavioral markers in analyzing team performance of cockpit crews. In R. Dietrich and T.M. Childress (eds), Group Interaction in High Risk Environments, (pp. 25-37). Aldershot Ashgate. 

AGA Clinical Practice and Economics Committee (2006) Position of the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute on computed tomographic colonography. Gastroenterology 131 1627-1628 Anderson ML, Heigh RI, McCoy GA et al. (1992) Accuracy of assessment of the extent of examination by experienced colonoscopists. Gastrointest Endosc 38 560-563 Ballard TJ, Lagorio S, De Santis M (2002) A retrospective cohort mortality study of Italian commercial airline cockpit crew and cabin attendants, 1965-96. Int J Occup Environ Health 8 87-96... 

According to a Boeing study, the failure of the cockpit crew has been a contributing factor in over 73% of aircraft accidents worldwide [11,12]. 

---