Crew workload

Using Task Network Modeling to Evaluate Crew Workload... 

CPI (Consumer Price Index), 2395 CPLEX, 2535, 2575 CP rule, see Critical path rule CPSC Children (anthropometric database), 1114 CQI (continuous quality improvement), 747 Creation of knowledge, 215 Creative destruction, 1888 Creativity models, 1812, 1814 CiewChief, 1050, 1112, 1118 Crew scheduling, 1743-1744, 1755-1757 Crew workload, evaluation of, 2420-2427 future command and control process,... 

Kakimoto, Y., Nakamura, A., Tarui, H., Nagasawa, Y., Yagura, S. (1988). Crew workload in JASDF C- transport flights 1. Change in heart rate and sahvaiy... 

Effect on flight crew No increase in flight crew workload SUght increase in workload, weU within their capabilities Physical discomfort or a significant increase in workload or impairing crew efficiency Physical distress or excessive workload impairs ability to perform tasks accurately or completely Fatalities or incapacitation... 

The risk/accident-based criteria (e.g. from Def Stan 00-56 or MIL-STD-882) considers the severity of various types of accidents and cannot directly allocate a severity to a failure mode which, for instance, leads to a significant increase in crew workload or conditions that impair crew efficiency . For more information, see Kritzinger (2006), Chapters 4 and 5. 

Provide warning systems which allow the crew to immediately recognise the problem and take appropriate corrective action. Consider the implication of multiple simultaneous warning (e.g. from cascade failures) and their impact on crew workload and performance (see Chapter 10). Ensure that the pilot is kept in the loop . For instance, an autopilot may automatically cope with a series of developing problems without informing the crew. When it reaches a point where the autopilot cannot control the aircraft, it may then suddenly drop a complex situation in the lap of the pilot. 

Assess Crew Workload. Evaluate pilot performance and capacity, especially during failure scenarios as well as flying on standby instruments only. 

Step 4, where crew workload is factored into the corrective action response. 

Hart, S.G. (1989). Crew workload-management strategies a critical factor in system performance. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium on Aviation Psychology, (pp. 22-27). Columbus, Ohio State University. 

Safety margins, operational capabilities, flight crew workload, any non-modifiable software components, protection mechanisms, and software boundaries. 

Major Failure conditions which would reduce the capability of the aircraft or the ability of the crew to cope with adverse operating conditions to the extent that there would be, for example, a significant reduction in safety margins or functional capabilities, a significant increase in crew workload or in conditions impairing crew efficiency, or discomfort to occupants, possibly including injuries. 

Minor Failure conditions which would not significantly reduce aircraft safety, and which would involve crew actions that are well within their capabilities. Minor failure conditions may include, for example, a slight reduction in safety margins or functional capabilities, a slight increase in crew workload, such as routine flight plan changes, or some inconvenience to occupants. 

No effect Failure conditions which do not affect the operational capability of the aircraft or increase crew workload. 

Automation in the FBW Airbus system contributes to improved safety by reducing crew workload, fatigue, and providing situational awareness and better survivability in extreme sitrrations, not to mention a better robustness against crew errors by reinforcing all the safety barriers (see Figure 6.12). Some of these barriers are described below. 

Self-diagnosis of failure and the automatic reconfiguration after failure (see section 6.1.4) helps to reduce crew workload. 

The FFIA provides a top-level analysis of the functions performed by the system and the risks presented by these functions following failure or misuse. These hazards produced by the system are categorised according to their level of severity. Potential effects on the aircraft or on crew workload determine each hazard s associated severity. 

---