Thoughts

SFCC/UND

SFCC/UND

Well-Known Member
In our class we have been having a huge debate about human factors and how aviation is not emphasizing it enough. My professor posted a topic on aviation maintenance, which I posted the link at the bottom. I would like to hear your thought about how we can improve human resources. It got me thinking about all of my checkrides and during my commercial checkride my examiner ask me would you fly under clouds? I said no and he said I passed that portion and to me that wasn't enough. And I don't understand why Jepp books only devote only a couple of pages to human resources.:panic: So I'm just curious to hear your thoughts on human factors.

http://www.aviationtoday.com/am/iss...adder-Still-Needs-to-Extend-Higher_30009.html
 
There are a few very interesting people, doing a lot of research & work towards improving Pilots awareness of the problems with Human Factors.
I know for a fact, some of them are seen as a type of "pain in the ass" because they keep speaking up about these issues which may show some steel ball guys that they can and are falling short... Human Factors training seems to be reserved for Airlines... the real pro's...

Here is the most interesting part of the article:

Once.....and it is more than organizational "lip service," then, and only then, can we say that we have reached the highest step on the human factors ladder.
Click to expand...

How many people do you know, who, if screwing up a maneuver during a checkride get stuck on it? How many people do you know, who perform incomplete, halfassed preflight inspections? Learning about Human Factors requires interest in Psychology. It demands a lot of dedication to be active in the field. I selected it as my special emphasis area during Safety Events & Seminars. It is part of my CFI studies & lesson plans. But, people love to learn about weather, GPS's, TAA's and even technical stuff... but Human Factors are continously falling short.
 
Cessna414JJB said:
There are a few very interesting people, doing a lot of research & work towards improving Pilots awareness of the problems with Human Factors.
I know for a fact, some of them are seen as a type of "pain in the ass" because they keep speaking up about these issues which may show some steel ball guys that they can and are falling short... Human Factors training seems to be reserved for Airlines... the real pro's...

Here is the most interesting part of the article:



How many people do you know, who, if screwing up a maneuver during a checkride get stuck on it? How many people do you know, who perform incomplete, halfassed preflight inspections? Learning about Human Factors requires interest in Psychology. It demands a lot of dedication to be active in the field. I selected it as my special emphasis area during Safety Events & Seminars. It is part of my CFI studies & lesson plans. But, people love to learn about weather, GPS's, TAA's and even technical stuff... but Human Factors are continously falling short.
Click to expand...
I find case studies interesting.

Like the Gulfstream in Aspen, or Korean 2033.

I've taken three college level CRM/Human Factors classes now, but it seems they left a lot to be answered.
 
I took both Human Factors and Safety in my college curriculum. While I learned a lot from both classes, the thing I took away is that aviation human factors is a very broad field with widely varying information. I feel like my classes left me aware of more problems than solutions, at least beyond "common sense".

Another problem I see is that it's very easy to evaluate one's progress in terms of stall proficiency, landings, or how they spin the knobs on a GNS-430... but how do you evaluate an individual's training in human factors?
 
OhioStatePilot said:
I took both Human Factors and Safety in my college curriculum. While I learned a lot from both classes, the thing I took away is that aviation human factors is a very broad field with widely varying information. I feel like my classes left me aware of more problems than solutions, at least beyond "common sense".

Another problem I see is that it's very easy to evaluate one's progress in terms of stall proficiency, landings, or how they spin the knobs on a GNS-430... but how do you evaluate an individual's training in human factors?
Click to expand...

You can't really. What someone does in the cockpit with an examiner next to them is not necessarily how they would react by themselves. Also, "common sense" is a very relative term.
 
ppragman said:
You can't really. What someone does in the cockpit with an examiner next to them is not necessarily how they would react by themselves. Also, "common sense" is a very relative term.
Click to expand...
True. However the examiner can get an idea of how the applicant will act. The examiners know if the applicant cant make good decisions.
 
ppragman said:
You can't really. What someone does in the cockpit with an examiner next to them is not necessarily how they would react by themselves. Also, "common sense" is a very relative term.
Click to expand...

That was precisely my point. Beyond that though, I think common sense is very closely tied to a person's belief system. No two people have the same beliefs and that comes from a lifetime education. The list goes on into other difficult to measure problems such as concentration. I'm sure you remember the instrument scan errors... stretch that out to encompass every gauge and dial in an aircraft while troubleshooting a gear problem in an IMC hold. I remember one example from my human factors class involving a three man crew CFIT in VMC because all three were head down trouble shooting a 2-green, 1-dark scenario. Post crash determined the bulb was simply burnt out.

ASpilot2be said:
True. However the examiner can get an idea of how the applicant will act. The examiners know if the applicant cant make good decisions.
Click to expand...

Well, I agree with this to an extent, but I'd say what's harder for an examiner is determining the applicant that not only can make good decisions, but will make good decisions. Everyone's on their best behavior for a check ride. There are a lot of smart people who can do everything by the book when it counts, but who throw the checklist out the window when no one's watching.
 
OhioStatePilot said:
Well, I agree with this to an extent, but I'd say what's harder for an examiner is determining the applicant that not only can make good decisions, but will make good decisions. Everyone's on their best behavior for a check ride. There are a lot of smart people who can do everything by the book when it counts, but who throw the checklist out the window when no one's watching.
Click to expand...
Agreed. This is where the examiners judgement comes into play. Of course the examiner wont get it right 100% of the time.
 
SFCC/UND said:
It got me thinking about all of my checkrides and during my commercial checkride my examiner ask me would you fly under clouds? I said no and he said I passed that portion
Click to expand...

Passed what? You wouldn't fly under a scattered, broken, or overcast sky as a commercial pilot? I must not be worthy of passing I would've said yes. Not only that but I would fly thru them. Gaaasp!
 
slushie said:
I find case studies interesting.

Like the Gulfstream in Aspen, or Korean 2033.

I always find the KLM crash very interesting because of all the human factors that came into play with the captain. Very professional pilot and somehow he made a lot of mistakes in one day. When we are in a hurry, it is amazing how many makes we make, without realizing it.


I've taken three college level CRM/Human Factors classes now, but it seems they left a lot to be answered.
Click to expand...

That is why I bring this up, just to get an idea of what other people think. We spend so much time perfecting maneuvers, when we don't even take the time to learn about ourselves.

wheelsup said:
Passed what? You wouldn't fly under a scattered, broken, or overcast sky as a commercial pilot? I must not be worthy of passing I would've said yes. Not only that but I would fly thru them. Gaaasp!
Click to expand...

I must say when I heard that I like whaaattttt. We were heading towards Sandpoint, ID and there are a lot of mountains up that way. Plus there was overcast skies covering the top of the mountains, but you could see the valleys. Of course no one would want to fly under the clouds. But a recent Learjet in FL made me change that thought.
 
 
SFCC/UND said:
I must say when I heard that I like whaaattttt. We were heading towards Sandpoint, ID and there are a lot of mountains up that way. Plus there was overcast skies covering the top of the mountains, but you could see the valleys. Of course no one would want to fly under the clouds. But a recent Learjet in FL made me change that thought.
Click to expand...

:confused:

I think this was an attempt to explain why not wanting to fly under the clouds was the correct answer, but I am completely lost as to the reasoning.
 
SFCC/UND said:
That is why I bring this up, just to get an idea of what other people think. We spend so much time perfecting maneuvers, when we don't even take the time to learn about ourselves.



I must say when I heard that I like whaaattttt. We were heading towards Sandpoint, ID and there are a lot of mountains up that way. Plus there was overcast skies covering the top of the mountains, but you could see the valleys. Of course no one would want to fly under the clouds. But a recent Learjet in FL made me change that thought.
Click to expand...

I don't understand this at all. If I'm in the hills I want to be under the clouds or way up over them. There's nothing wrong with flying around underthem if you use some judgment about what is safe and what is not. Don't pass the point of no return and you shouldn't have any problems.
 
What I think he was trying to explain was don't fly under clouds in a mountain area where you are not familiar what is underneath them. What happen when you do fly under clouds between a valley and the valley starts rising up and you end up in the clouds? Next thing you know you hit a mountain that is covered up by clouds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top