FDAI logo   ::  Site Map  ::   
Home  |  About This Database  |  Contact Us
About This Database » Expert Survey Evidence » Evidence from Expert Survey Alphabetically by Issue

Evidence from Expert Survey Alphabetically by Issue

This page lists the issues identified in our study in alphabetical order of abbreviated issue statement. Each issue is linked to a page containing its complete issue statement and the evidence related to it found in the analysis of our flight deck automation expert survey.


A
    automation behavior may be unexpected and unexplained (issue108) EVIDENCE
    automation information in manuals may be inadequate (issue140) EVIDENCE
    automation integration may be poor (issue011) EVIDENCE
    automation level decisions may be difficult (issue103) EVIDENCE
    automation may adversely affect pilot workload (issue079) EVIDENCE
    automation may be over-emphasized in pilot evaluation (issue116) EVIDENCE
    automation may be too complex (issue040) EVIDENCE
    automation may demand attention (issue102) EVIDENCE
    automation may lack reasonable functionality (issue109) EVIDENCE
    automation may not work well under unusual conditions (issue150) EVIDENCE
    automation may use different control strategies than pilots (issue122) EVIDENCE
    automation performance may be limited (issue126) EVIDENCE
    automation requirements may conflict (issue160) EVIDENCE
    automation skills may be lost (issue137) EVIDENCE
    automation use may slow pilot responses (issue161) EVIDENCE
    automation use philosophy may be lacking (issue101) EVIDENCE

B
    behavior of automation may not be apparent (issue083) EVIDENCE
    both pilots' attention simultaneously diverted by programming (issue075) EVIDENCE

C
    commercial incentives may dominate (issue127) EVIDENCE
    communication between computers may be unsupervised (issue022) EVIDENCE
    complex automation may have overly simplistic interface (issue128) EVIDENCE
    controls of automation may be poorly designed (issue037) EVIDENCE
    crew assignment may be inappropriate (issue142) EVIDENCE
    crew coordination problems may occur (issue084) EVIDENCE
    cross checking may be difficult (issue072) EVIDENCE
    cultural differences may not be considered (issue165) EVIDENCE

D
    data access may be difficult (issue047) EVIDENCE
    data entry and programming may be difficult and time consuming (issue112) EVIDENCE
    data entry errors on keyboards may occur (issue071) EVIDENCE
    data presentation may be too abstract (issue087) EVIDENCE
    data re-entry may be required (issue049) EVIDENCE
    database may be erroneous or incomplete (issue110) EVIDENCE
    deficiencies in basic aircraft training may exist (issue063) EVIDENCE
    displays (visual and aural) may be poorly designed (issue092) EVIDENCE

F
    failure assessment may be difficult (issue025) EVIDENCE
    failure modes may be unanticipated by designers (issue024) EVIDENCE
    failure recovery may be difficult (issue023) EVIDENCE
    false alarms may be frequent (issue070) EVIDENCE
    fatigue may be induced (issue156) EVIDENCE
    flightdeck automation may be incompatible with ATC system (issue082) EVIDENCE
    function allocation may be difficult (issue117) EVIDENCE

H
    human-centered design philosophy may be lacking (issue100) EVIDENCE

I
    inadvertent autopilot disengagement may be too easy (issue123) EVIDENCE
    information integration may be required (issue009) EVIDENCE
    information overload may exist (issue014) EVIDENCE
    information processing load may be increased (issue119) EVIDENCE
    instructor training requirements may be inadequate (issue143) EVIDENCE
    insufficient information may be displayed (issue099) EVIDENCE
    interface may be poorly designed (issue039) EVIDENCE
    inter-pilot communication may be reduced (issue139) EVIDENCE

J
    job satisfaction may be reduced (issue013) EVIDENCE

M
    manual operation may be difficult after transition from automated control (issue055) EVIDENCE
    manual skills may be lost (issue065) EVIDENCE
    manual skills may not be acquired (issue007) EVIDENCE
    mode awareness may be lacking (issue095) EVIDENCE
    mode selection may be incorrect (issue145) EVIDENCE
    mode transitions may be uncommanded (issue044) EVIDENCE
    monitoring requirements may be excessive (issue005) EVIDENCE

N
    new tasks and errors may exist (issue089) EVIDENCE
    non-automated pilot tasks may not be integrated (issue153) EVIDENCE

O
    older pilots may be less accepting of automation (issue132) EVIDENCE
    operational knowledge may be lacking in design (issue121) EVIDENCE

P
    pilot control authority may be diffused (issue104) EVIDENCE
    pilot selection may be more difficult (issue136) EVIDENCE
    pilots have responsibility but may lack authority (issue012) EVIDENCE
    pilots may be out of the loop (issue002) EVIDENCE
    pilots may be overconfident in automation (issue131) EVIDENCE
    pilots may be reluctant to assume control (issue026) EVIDENCE
    pilots may lack confidence in automation (issue046) EVIDENCE
    pilots may not be involved in equipment selection (issue141) EVIDENCE
    pilots may over-rely on automation (issue106) EVIDENCE
    pilots may under-rely on automation (issue146) EVIDENCE
    pilot's role may be changed (issue144) EVIDENCE
    planning requirements may be increased (issue158) EVIDENCE
    procedures may assume automation (issue151) EVIDENCE
    protections may be lost though pilots continue to rely on them (issue015) EVIDENCE

S
    scan pattern may change (issue038) EVIDENCE
    similarity may be superficial (issue149) EVIDENCE
    situation awareness may be reduced (issue114) EVIDENCE
    software versions may proliferate (issue134) EVIDENCE
    standardization may be lacking (issue138) EVIDENCE
    state prediction may be lacking (issue152) EVIDENCE

T
    testing may be inadequate (issue115) EVIDENCE
    traffic coordination requirements may increase (issue148) EVIDENCE
    training may be inadequate (issue133) EVIDENCE
    transitioning between aircraft may increase errors (issue130) EVIDENCE
    transitioning between aircraft may increase training requirements (issue129) EVIDENCE

U
    understanding of automation may be inadequate (issue105) EVIDENCE

V
    vertical profile visualization may be difficult (issue053) EVIDENCE

W
    workarounds may be necessary (issue107) EVIDENCE



  Last update: 5 February 2007 Flight Deck Automation Issues Website  
© 1997-2013 Research Integrations, Inc.