On the topic of error rates, the late Frank Hawkins in his book "Human
Factors in Flight" quotes two sets of figures:
1. "about 70% of aircraft accidents could be attributed to the
performance of man," Meier Muller, H. (1940) Flugwehr Und Technik, 1:412-414
and 2:40-42.
2. referring to areas outside aviation: "80-90% of accidents are due to
human error," Drew,G.C. The study of accidents. Bulletin of the British
Psychological Society, 16:1-10.
Course notes from the Swinburne Postgrad Dip in Aviation Human Factors,
compiled by Mark Wiggins, quote 70% from the source:
Jensen, R.S. & Benel, R.A. (1977) Judgement, evaluation and instruction in
civil pilot training. Springfield, VA: Federal Aviation Administration
(NTISFAA-RD-78-28).
(Comments, Dick?)
Mark also mentions that a recent study in New Zealand has shown that the
statistic has not changed in the last 10 - 15 years.
All very good, but I think Graham Braithwaite, Hidetake Sakuma and Greg Deen
have all combined very well to illustrate the vital point. It is only a
statistic. Rather than being concerned with whether we aim for a zero error
rate, or how we classify error, I think our first aim should be to shift the
culture of aviation towards accepting error as normal, as a given. Once we
can accept error as normal, maybe we can move people away from punishing it.
Perhaps then we can start focussing on error recognition and error
management techniques in our training. I see the move towards error
management, and its effect on aviation training, as being akin to the
application of Reason's theories in the safety environment. Its a new way
of thinking.
Guy Standen