Human factor issues can create situations of great harm if not mitigated. Human-machine interface, monotony, fatigue, and automation reliance have the potential to create human performance errors. The below information highlights what this author learned from this week’s studies:
Human-Machine Interface
Human-machine interface has always been a human factor challenge in the aerospace community. Crewmembers dealt with constantly changing rules, technology, and work environments designed with the intent to improve air travel, since the birth of flight. Some ideas worked and some made user situations worse. As in the manned aircraft environment, simple system designs evolved to increase reliability and reduce crew cognition overload (Dolgov & Hottman, 2012). In the case of many unmanned aircraft, common control station setups have taken on the likeness of an office space with gaming accessories sourced from different commercial companies. That kind of workspace has the ability to introduce outcome inconsistencies and distractions (Hobbs & Lyall, 2016). Monotony and Fatigue
Monotony contributes to fatigue. Whether piloting a manned or unmanned aircraft, passive monitoring of automated systems can be monotonous and can deafen alertness (Thompson et al., 2006). Schneider & Macdonald (2014) point out that unmanned crews have greater potential for mitigating physiological distractions by performing simple tasks such as switching out crewmembers every few hours. The crew change could allow fresh eyes to continue the mission.
Automation Reliance
Aircraft automation is available to support users through all phases of flight. Hobbs (2018) noted that remote pilots with some Detect and Avoid (DAA) systems have a better awareness of traffic than manned aircraft with windows. The inference being that some DAA systems distinguishes aircraft without transponders. However, this author understands the conventional window of a manned aircraft as an additional advantage. Peripherals of the human eye assist with flight orientation and threat awareness (Hobbs & Lyall, 2016).
References
Dolgov, I., & Hottman, S. B. (2012). Chapter 11. Human Factors in Unmanned Aircraft Systems. In R. K. Barnhart, S. B. Hottman, M. D. Marshall, & E. Shappee (Eds.), Introduction to unmanned aircraft systems (pp. 165-180). Taylor & Francis Group.
Hobbs, A., & Lyall, B. (2016, April 27). Human Factors Guidelines for Unmanned Aircraft Systems. Ergonomics in Design. https://human-factors.arc.nasa.gov/publications/Hobbs_Lyall_Ergonomics_Design_prepub.pdf
Hobbs, A. (2018). Chapter 17. Remotely Piloted Aircraft. In S. J. Landry (Ed.), Handbook of Human Factors in Air Transportation Systems (pp. 379-396). Taylor & Francis Group
Schneider, J., Macdonald, J. (2014, June 16). Are manned or unmanned aircraft better on the battlefield? Cicero Magazine. https://ciceromagazine.com/features/manned-unmanned-aircraft-better-battlefield/
Thompson, W. T., Lopez, N., Hickey, P., DaLuz, C., & Caldwell, J. L., Tvaryanas, A.P. (2006). Effects of shift work and sustained operations: Operator performance in remotely piloted aircraft (OP-REPAIR) (Report No. HSW-PE-BR-TR-2006-0001). https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a443145.pdf
