Objective: A conceptual model is proposed in order to explain pilot performance in surprising and startling situations. Background: Today’s debate around loss of control following in-flight events and the implementation of upset prevention and recovery training has highlighted the importance of pilots’ ability to deal with unexpected events. Unexpected events, such as technical malfunctions or automation surprises, potentially induce a "startle factor" that may significantly impair performance. Method: Literature on surprise, startle, resilience, and decision making is reviewed, and findings are combined into a conceptual model. A number of recent flight incident and accident cases are then used to illustrate elements of the model. Results: Pilot perception and actions are conceptualized as being guided by "frames," or mental knowledge structures that were previously learned. Performance issues in unexpected situations can often be traced back to insufficient adaptation of one’s frame to the situation. It is argued that such sensemaking or reframing processes are especially vulnerable to issues caused by startle or acute stress. Conclusion: Interventions should focus on (a) increasing the supply and quality of pilot frames (e.g., though practicing a variety of situations), (b) increasing pilot reframing skills (e.g., through the use of unpredictability in training scenarios), and (c) improving pilot metacognitive skills, so that inappropriate automatic responses to startle and surprise can be avoided. Application: The model can be used to explain pilot behavior in accident cases, to design experiments and training simulations, to teach pilots metacognitive skills, and to identify intervention methods. © 2017, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0018720817723428

Dealing With Unexpected Events on the Flight Deck: A Conceptual Model of Startle and Surprise

Objective: This study tested whether simulator-based training of pilot responses to unexpected or novel events can be improved by including unpredictability and variability in training scenarios. Background: Current regulations allow for highly predictable and invariable training, which may not be sufficient to prepare pilots for unexpected or novel situations in-flight. Training for surprise will become mandatory in the near future. Method: Using an aircraft model largely unfamiliar to the participants, one group of 10 pilots (the unpredictable and variable [U/V] group) practiced responses to controllability issues in a relatively U/V manner. A control group of another 10 pilots practiced the same failures in a highly predictable and invariable manner. After the practice, performance of all pilots was tested in a surprise scenario, in which the pilots had to apply the learned knowledge. To control for surprise habituation and familiarization with the controls, two control tests were included. Results: Whereas the U/V group required more time than the control group to identify failures during the practice, the results indicated superior understanding and performance in the U/V group as compared to the control group in the surprise test. There were no significant differences between the groups in surprise or performance in the control tests. Conclusion: Given the results, we conclude that organizing pilot training in a more U/V way improves transfer of training to unexpected situations in-flight. Application: The outcomes suggest that the inclusion of U/V simulator training scenarios is important when training pilots for unexpected situations.

/pdf/training-pilots-for-unexpected-events-a-simulator-study-on-3anzuwd2eg.pdf

Training Pilots for Unexpected Events: A Simulator Study on the Advantage of Unpredictable and Variable Scenarios.

Many wireless communications systems found in aircraft lack standard security mechanisms, leaving them vulnerable to attack. With affordable software-defined radios readily available, a novel threat has emerged which allows a wide range of attackers to easily interfere with wireless avionic systems. Whilst these vulnerabilities are known, predicting their ultimate effect is difficult. A major factor in this effect is how flight crew respond, especially whether their extensive training in fault handling helps them to manage attacks. To investigate this we conducted a user study, inviting 30 Airbus A320 type-rated pilots to fly simulator scenarios in which they were subjected to attacks on their avionics. We use wireless attacks on three safety-related systems, based on existing literature: Traffic Collision Avoidance System (TCAS), Ground Proximity Warning System (GPWS) and the Instrument Landing System (ILS). To analyze their response, we collected control input data coupled with closed and open interview responses. We found that all three attack scenarios created significant control impact and disruption through missed approaches, avoidance maneuvers and diversions. They further increased workload, distrust in the affected system, and for each attack, at least a third of our participants switched off the system entirely—even if they were important safety systems. All pilots felt the scenarios were useful, with 93.3% feeling that simulator training for wireless attacks could be valuable.

A view from the cockpit: exploring pilot reactions to attacks on avionic systems

ObjectiveThe study was designed to investigate whether a simulated unexpected abnormal flight event can lead to startle and explore differences in behavioral responses between expected and unexpect...

Responding to an Unexpected In-Flight Event: Physiological Arousal, Information Processing, and Performance

Modern fly-by-wire aircraft use flight envelope protection systems, whose actions are not always clear to pilots. To promote situation awareness, proximity to the limits of the flight envelope can be communicated using haptic feedback, by providing forces through the control device. Such a system was developed and this paper reports on the evaluation experiment. Professional pilots were invited to fly an Airbus A320 model in the Delft University of Technology Simona research simulator. A windshear and an icing scenario were flown using a full and degraded control law, with and without the haptic feedback system. The objective results show that the haptic feedback system does not lead to significant improvements in either performance or safety metrics, but also does not interfere with nominal pilot tasks. In the debriefing questionnaire, however, pilots expressed a clear preference for the haptic system. Recommendations for future research include the addition of visual support to complement the haptic cues, and the redesign of the scenarios to allow pilots more freedom in control.

/pdf/evaluation-of-a-haptic-feedback-system-for-flight-envelope-tufl9yp564.pdf

Evaluation of a Haptic Feedback System for Flight Envelope Protection

Objective: The aim of this study was to test if performance of airline pilots, in performing an aerodynamic stall recovery procedure, decreases when they are surprised, compared to when they anticipate a stall event. Background: New flight-safety regulations for commercial aviation recommend the introduction of surprise and startle in upset prevention and recovery training. This calls for more evidence on the effects of surprise on pilot performance, as well as methods to effectively induce surprise in training simulators. Method: The study took place in a motion-base simulator with a poststall aerodynamic model. Using a within-subjects design, the recovery performance of 20 pilots was tested in 2 conditions: 1 anticipated condition, and 1 surprise condition. In addition to flight parameters, subjective and physiological data relating to surprise and startle were measured. Results: Pilots had significantly more difficulties with adhering to the recovery procedure in the surprise condition compared to the anticipation condition. The subjective and physiological measures confirmed that the manipulation mainly increased surprise, and to a lesser extent also startle. Conclusion: The results suggest that pilots have more difficulty in managing an upset situation (i.e., an aerodynamic stall) when this situation is presented unexpectedly, underlining that upset prevention and recovery training should include elements of surprise.

/pdf/the-influence-of-surprise-on-upset-recovery-performance-in-2obt5r3f5l.pdf

H.M. Landman

Papers

The Influence of Surprise on Upset Recovery Performance in Airline Pilots