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

Evidence from Resource 6 pieces of evidence from this resource.

Rudisill, M. (1994). Flight Crew Experience with Automation Technologies on Commercial Transport Flight Decks. In M. Mouloua & R. Parasuraman (Eds.), Human Performance in Automated Systems: Current Research and Trends. Proceedings of the 1st Automation Technology and Human Performance Conference, held in Washington, DC April 7-9, 1994, 203-211. Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  1.  
  2. Evidence Type: Excerpt from Survey
    Evidence: "It was generally felt that the younger pilots were able to adapt to advanced technology aircraft faster because of a familiarity with computerization. The older pilots who were more experienced with flying non-automated aircraft appeared to be somewhat uncomfortable with the computerization at first but, with some experience and attitude adjustment, they became equally proficient by the end of training." (page 208-209)
    Issue: older pilots may be less accepting of automation (Issue #132) See Issue details
    Strength: +1
    Aircraft: unspecified
    Equipment: automation

  3.  
  4. Evidence Type: Excerpt from Survey
    Evidence: "Impact of automation on crew operations: With regard to workload, the typical view reflected in the pilot comments was that, once you become experienced with automation, it significantly lowers workload associated with 'routine' tasks in low workload flight phases under normal circumstances. However, automation increases workload during abnormal situations and during high workload phases of flight (e.g., in terminal areas; when required to follow a non-programmed flight path). A significant number of respondents ... took issue with the assumption that automation actually lowered workload." (page 207)
    Issue: automation may adversely affect pilot workload (Issue #79) See Issue details
    Strength: +1
    Aircraft: unspecified
    Equipment: automation

  5.  
  6. Evidence Type: Excerpt from Survey
    Evidence: "Impact of automation on crew operations: With regard to workload, the typical view reflected in the pilot comments was that, once you become experienced with automation, it significantly lowers workload associated with 'routine' tasks in low workload flight phases under normal circumstances. However, automation increases workload during abnormal situations and during high workload phases of flight (e.g., in terminal areas; when required to follow a non-programmed flight path). A significant number of respondents, however, took issue with the assumption that automation actually lowered workload." (page 207)
    Issue: automation may adversely affect pilot workload (Issue #79) See Issue details
    Strength: +1
    Aircraft: unspecified
    Equipment: automation

  7.  
  8. Evidence Type: Excerpt from Survey
    Evidence: "There were a number of concerns with use of the FMS. The primary concern was too much head-down time with one pilot being forced out-of-the-loop because of preoccupation with FMS or for reprogramming (e.g., for rerouting), especially in busy terminal area or during a system malfunction." (page 207)
    Issue: automation may demand attention (Issue #102) See Issue details
    Strength: +1
    Aircraft: unspecified
    Equipment: FMS

  9.  
  10. Evidence Type: Excerpt from Survey
    Evidence: "With regard to the automation philosophy, there was a general feeling that the aircraft had been designed by engineers and flight test staff, that operational and practical experience of line operations was not incorporated into the design, that the pilot was being 'automated out' of the flight deck, and that the pilots' role had been forgotten." (page 207)
    Issue: operational knowledge may be lacking in design process (Issue #121) See Issue details
    Strength: +1
    Aircraft: unspecified
    Equipment: automation

  11.  
  12. Evidence Type: Excerpt from Survey
    Evidence: "Impact of automation on crew operations: With regard to workload, the typical view reflected in the pilot comments was that, once you become experienced with automation, it significantly lowers workload associated with 'routine' tasks in low workload flight phases under normal circumstances. However, automation increases workload during abnormal situations and during high workload phases of flight (e.g., in terminal areas; when required to follow a non-programmed flight path). A significant number of respondents ... took issue with the assumption that automation actually lowered workload." (page 207)
    Issue: automation may adversely affect pilot workload (Issue #79) See Issue details
    Strength: -1
    Aircraft: unspecified
    Equipment: automation
Flight Deck Automation Issues Website  
© 1997-2013 Research Integrations, Inc.