FDAI logo   ::  Site Map  ::   
Home  |  About This Website  |  Contact Us
Home » ... » Evidence from Resource

Evidence from Resource 4 pieces of evidence from this resource.

Beringer, D.B., & Harris, H.C., Jr. (1999). Automation in general aviation: Two studies of pilot responses to autopilot malfunctions. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 9(2), 155-174. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  1.  
  2. Evidence Type: Excerpt from Experiment
    Evidence: "When asked to report on the difficulty and ease of diagnosing and recovering from autopilot failures experienced during their experimental session, our subjects unanimously agreed that runaway pitch trim was the most difficult from which to recover. The most difficult failure to diagnose was spilt across three: ADI, pitch sensor, and runaway pitch trim, with each failure receiving 27% of the votes. Pitch sensor was voted the easiest to diagnose by 46% of the subjects, with runaway pitch trim being cited by 36%. Pitch sensor was voted easiest to correct by 56% of the subjects." (page 78)
    Issue: failure recovery may be difficult (Issue #23) See Issue details
    Strength: +3
    Aircraft: unspecified
    Equipment: autoflight: autopilot

  3.  
  4. Evidence Type: Excerpt from Experiment
    Evidence: "When asked to report on the difficulty and ease of diagnosing and recovering from autopilot failures experienced during their experimental session, our subjects unanimously agreed that runaway pitch trim was the most difficult from which to recover. The most difficult failure to diagnose was spilt across three: ADI, pitch sensor, and runaway pitch trim, with each failure receiving 27% of the votes. Pitch sensor was voted the easiest to diagnose by 46% of the subjects, with runaway pitch trim being cited by 36%. Pitch sensor was voted easiest to correct by 56% of the subjects." (page 78)
    Issue: failure assessment may be difficult (Issue #25) See Issue details
    Strength: +2
    Aircraft: unspecified
    Equipment: autoflight: autopilot

  5.  
  6. Evidence Type: Excerpt from Experiment
    Evidence: "Soft pitch (pitch sensor). The pitch-sensor failure caused a slow deviation from level pitch while the ADI continued to show correct pitch indications, simulating loss of sensor data to the autopilot. First response to this failure ranged from 330 msec to 73.7 seconds (mean = 16.62; median = 12.51). AP disconnect times ranged from 5.9 1 to 73.7 seconds (mean =24.8; median = 15.4). Although 60% of the pilots disconnected in less than 20 seconds, 33% fell between 30 and 60 seconds. This was due both to the comparative subtlety of the failure and to the ability of pilots to manually override the pitch servo without disconnecting." (page 77)
    Issue: failure assessment may be difficult (Issue #25) See Issue details
    Strength: +1
    Aircraft: unspecified
    Equipment: autoflight: autopilot

  7.  
  8. Evidence Type: Excerpt from Experiment
    Evidence: "All pilots understood that they could overpower the autopilot servos manually. A number were aware of the potential interaction between runaway pitch-trim and autopilot pitch attitude (elevator servo) inputs, whereby the autopilotdriven elevator servo masks the initial stage of the pitch trim excursion." (page 78)
    Issue: understanding of automation may be inadequate (Issue #105) See Issue details
    Strength: -3
    Aircraft: unspecified
    Equipment: autoflight: autopilot
Flight Deck Automation Issues Website  
© 1997-2013 Research Integrations, Inc.