I have a small request....
>I couldn't help but think that a short discussion of
>Cali during the speed brake or GPWS lesson would
>go a long way toward building defenses against error.
>We do not normally think of systems training as the
>place to insert these human factors segments. However,
>when we think in terms of building aircrew defenses
>against error, this awareness can be built in segments
>throughout the curriculum.
>
>Just a few thoughts.....
>
>Vince Mancuso, Ph.D.
>
>P.S., I would like to see a tiger team formed to build
>human factors in automation curricula and/or guidlines
>for automation training that any training manager could
>easily translate for use in their operation.
If I may ask a favor...while you beat this topic about out on the list, keep the
following questions in mind:
1) What were the biggest mistakes made in introducing automation into a "Hands
On" oriented group?
2) What methodology has been discovered which allows for the rapid (i.e. nearly
instantaneous) recupperation of situational awareness, or at least
re-orientation thereof, of the user of (recently?) automated systems during
moments of high workload transition or even work-overload events?
3) What training methodology has been developed which ensures the core,
rudimentary abilities and mental acuity central to "the task at hand" are not
ignored - preferably, these core abilities and mental capabilities are enhanced
- even as technology and automation have made such redundancy appear useless?
And while you ponder these questions, please think about how they could possibly
be applied to the realm of Air Traffic Control. How are controllers to be
trained in new, highly automated systems while retaining their core ability to
keep the "mental chessboard" intact? How are controllers to ensure seperation
in complex, congested enviroments when they are dealing with B757-400s vs. DC-9s
vs. BE02s vs. An-124s?
Sincerely,
Brian J. Fallon
NATCA Safety Representative, NY TRACON
Associate Editor, The NATCA Voice
http://www.natcavoice.org