Aircraft Mechanics Civilian vs. Military Human Factors That Cause Aircraft Incidents at the Ground Level

Human Factors Leading to Aircraft Incidents at the Ground Level:

MILITARY VS. CIVILIAN.

Human factors that cause aircraft incidents at the ground level. Aircraft Mechanics:

Civilian vs. Military.

The objective of this study is to investigate human factors that cause the aircraft incidents at the ground level. A case of Aircraft Mechanics: Civilian vs. Military. The study uses experimental method to carry out the research. The paper generates hypothesis to compare human factors that lead to the civilian and military aircraft incidents at the ground level. The study presents the research findings in tables and graphs and the research findings show that human factors leading to the aircraft incidents at the ground level is higher in the military aircraft than the civilian aircraft.

Introduction

Worldwide commercial aviation has suffered huge costs of damage from the ground-related incidents estimated to reach more than $4 Billion. On the other hand, Flight Safety Foundation provides higher estimates pointing out that aircraft incidents at the ground could reach up to $10 billion. (Balk, 2007). Human factors leading to the ground handling process have been one of the major causes of casualties in the civilian and military aircraft globally. Human factors refer to the organization, human and individual factors which can affect the health and safety at work. This definition shows that human factors could have negative impact on personnel behavior, and many of the incidents that occurred to the military and civilian aircraft at the ground level have been caused by the human factors. Within civilian aviation, human factors are the contributing cause of the ground handling incidents resulting to the aircraft damages per 5000 flights. Typically, 61% of the aircraft incidents at the ground level are caused by the interface between the aircraft and ground handling equipment.

Within the United States, it has been generally agreed that human factors have been the major contributors to the aircraft causalities at the ground level and one of the human factors leading to the aircraft incidents is human errors. Typically, between 70 and 80% of the aircraft incidents at the ground level are caused by human errors. (Li, et al. 2002, Wiegman, & Shappell 2001).

The study formulates research objective to enhance greater understanding of the case of Civilian vs. Military Aircraft incidents at the ground level.

Research Objective

To investigate human factors that causes the aircraft incidents at the ground level. A case of Aircraft Mechanics: Civilian vs. Military.

The study explores the similar studies to enhance greater understanding on the human factors that cause the aircraft incidents at the ground level in the Civilian vs. Military aircraft.

Description of Similar Research

Wurmstein, et al. (2004) define human factors as the "science of analyzing the limitations of humans as we interact with the environment and preventing or mitigating the inevitable human error." (P12). Human limitations come from 5Ps that comprise of the following:

Physical (cold, heat, etc.);

Physiological (blood flow, oxygen, etc.);

Psychological (information processing, senses, etc.);

Psychosocial (communication, team interaction, etc.) and Pathological (injury and illness). (Wurmstein, Shetler, & Moening, 2004).

The study uses HFACS (Human Factors Analysis and Classification) to identify the human factors that cause aircraft incidents at the ground level in the civilian and military aircraft. HFACS identifies human factors that cause the aircraft incidents and provides the process of implementing the preventions. HFACS is based on the Swiss Cheese model showing how human errors lead to the aircraft incidents. HFACS taxonomy comprise of Unsafe Acts that comprise of errors and violations and are sub-categorized as Skill-Based Errors, Decision Errors, Perceptual Errors and routing violation.(Wiegmann & Shappell 2003).

Department of Defense, (2005) shows that human error is one of the major human factors that cause both military and civilian aircraft incidents. Human errors contribute to between 80 and 90% of the aircraft incidents at the ground level. Balk, & Bossenbroek, (2010) support this argument by pointing out that human factors have been the major causes of the aircraft incidents at the ground level, and human error is one of the human factors that causes aircraft incidents at the ground level. Within the civilian aviation, operational personnel are the major contributor of human errors, which subsequently contribute to aircraft incidents. Typically, ineffective communication from operational personnel is relatively contributing to human errors and the issue has been attributed to lack of effective leadership and supervision.

Poor leadership and supervision within civilian aviation could lead to human errors and consequently leading to aircraft incidents at the ground level. It is essential to realize that poor leadership could lead to the communication breakdown between department head and staff. When there is a communication breakdown, there would be an ineffective supervision of aircraft personnel at the ground level, which could consequently lead to the aircraft incidents. More importantly, time pressure is another factor that leads to human errors because time pressure could lead to fatigue and stress.

Bureau of Air Safety Investigation (1996) makes similar argument by pointing out that human error at the ground level could lead to fatal aircraft accidents. The inadequate pre-flight planning and preparation have been the origin of many aircraft incidents. It is essential to realize that origin of many aircraft accidents starts at the ground level before the aircraft takes off. The pre-flight planning and preparation include pre-flight aircraft checking and weather briefing. Pre-fight planning also includes fuel checking, and aircraft flight efficiency. The pre-flight planning could be unreliable if adequate checks are not implemented before the aircraft takes off. The case of a night freight flight in Australia from Sidney to Melbourne illustrates the incidents of ineffective pre-flight planning. The aircraft had a dual engine failure when on the air, and aircraft had difficulties in landing because it lost contact with Air Traffic Services making the aircraft to subsequently collide at the road cutting. Upon investigation, it was discovered that both engines of the aircraft ran out of fuel. The conclusion of the investigation revealed that management implemented ineffective pre-planning preparation before the flight took off, and the whole issue led to the aircraft accident.

Wiegman, et al. (2001) make correlation between human errors and occupation incidents in both military and civilian aviation sector, and the authors argue that this issue has led to between 70% and 80% of aviation incidents at ground level. The authors categorized human errors as:

unsafe acts of operators preconditions for unsafe acts, unsafe supervision,

Organizational influences.

Decision-based error is also one of the common forms of error affecting the safety of civilian and military aircraft at the ground level. Decision-based errors represent goal and conscious-intended behaviors that prove inappropriate and inadequate for the situation. Typically, decision-based errors are often referred as honest mistakes typically manifest into poorly executed procedures. Decision-based errors also refer to misuse or misinterpretation of relevant situation.

The second form of error is skilled-based error that occurs with little or no conscious thought. The skill-based error is the major human factors that cause military and civilian aircraft incidents at the ground level. Skills of aircraft personnel represent the skills possessed by aviation personnel to enhance efficient operations of military and civilian aircraft at the ground level. Thus, the skilled-based errors occur when personnel are unable to use their skills to enhance effective aircraft mechanical operations. "As a result, skill-based errors such as the breakdown in visual scan patterns, inadvertent activation/deactivation of switches, forgotten intentions, and omitted items in checklists often appear." (Wiegman, et al. 2001 P. 4). Generally, number of the skill-based errors is higher in the civilian aircraft incidents than the military aircraft incidents. Average number of skilled-based errors in civilian aviation is 70% compared to 52.5% found in Military aviation. (Wiegman, et al. 2004).

Organization influence is another major human factor affecting civilian and military aviation at the ground level. Organization influence represents the decision of upper-level management, which can directly influence supervisory practice of operators. Generally, organization influence revolves around three issues:

1) resource management,

2) organizational climate, and

3) Operational processes.

Resources management represents allocation, management as well as maintenance of organizational resources. These include human resources management that encompasses training, selection and staffing. The resource management also includes equipment design, monetary safety budgets, and ergonomic specifications. Generally, corporate decision on resource management centers on cost-effective operations and safety objectives, which an organization needs to balance to enhance aircraft safety operations at the ground level. However, during the time of fiscal austerity, organization may face challenges to balance the two objectives. The safety and training would be the first units within the organization to experience the impact of austerity due to financial constraints.

Shappell & Wiegmann (2004) argue that the budgetary austerity is more noticeable in the civilian aircraft than the military aircraft because the percentages of skilled-based errors are higher in the civilian aircraft than the military aircraft. The major factor leading to the higher increase in the skilled-based errors in civilian aircraft than the military aircraft is that civilian aviation will be the first to reduce the training of its personnel during financial constraints.

Shappell & Wiegmann (2004) compares the human factors that cause the aircraft incidents at the ground level between civilian aircraft and military aircraft. The authors identify four human factors, which include:

Unsafe operator act

Organizational Influence

Unsafe Supervision

Precondition for unsafe acts

Unsafe act operators represent errors and violation. Errors represent physical and mental activities that prevent individuals to achieve their intended outcomes, while violation represents willful disregard of rules and regulations that governs the aircraft safety at the ground level. Violation that could lead to the civilian and military incidents at the ground level includes:

Failure of personnel to adhere to brief

Violation of the training rules

Failure to adhere to the pre-flight guideline. (Shappell, and Wiegmann, 2000).

Hypothesis

The hypothesis of this experiment is as follow:

H1: Human Factors leading to the aircraft incidents at the ground level is higher in the military aviation than the civilian aviation.

H0: Human Factors leading to the aircraft incidents at the ground level is higher in the civilian aviation than the military aviation.

Table 1 provides the summary of the data collected and the research findings. The data analysis assists the researcher to deliver valid research findings.

Table 1: Summary of Research Findings

CIVILIAN

Skilled-Based Errors

Decision-Based Errors

Violation

General Aviation

80%

35%

15%

Commercial Schedule

60%

35%

30%

Commercial Non-Schedule

70%

40%

20%

Average

70%

36.6%

21.66%

CIVILIAN

Mean

0.43 (43%)

Median

0.35 (35%)

Standard Deviation

0.22 (22%)

MILITARY

US Army

50%

40%

30%

US Naval Helo

40%

60%

50%

US Naval TACAIR

60%

58%

30%

USAF TACAIR

60%

45%

5%

Average

52.5%

50.75%

25.75%

MILITARY

Mean

0.44 (44%)

Median

0.47(47.5%)

Standard Deviation

0.17(17)%

Method

This study uses experimental method to carry out the research. The study plans to determine if human factors leading to the aircraft incidents at the ground level is higher in the military aircraft than the civilian aircraft. The results of the experiment will be relevant to the aviation industry. The goal of this research is to determine the human factor leading to the aircraft incidents at the ground level. To achieve this objective, the study uses the hypothesis to test the validity of the experiment. Similar research has been conducted that compares human factors leading to the aircraft incidents at the ground level in the military and civilian aircraft. Shappell et al. (2004) compare military aircraft and civilian aircraft incidents. The authors use data collected on 16,000 military aircraft incidents and compare them to the civilian aircraft incidents in the United States. Shappell et al. (2004) research is similar to this study because the goal of this research is to compare the human factors leading to the civilian and military aircraft incidents.

The procedure used to carry out the experiment was by collecting data from case studies of aircraft incidents involving experimental aircraft in which human factors played significant roles. In all cases, engineers, operators, and managers contributed to all the incidents that occurred, and human factors such as design factors, physiological factors and organization factors were involved in the aircraft incidents.

The research also carries out comprehensive review of the research papers found in the U.S. government database in the Department of Defense and Department of Transport. The study also searches several academic databases to identify the quality journal articles to assist in completing this study. The paper searches academic database such as Ebscohost database, Science Direct, Emerald Insight and Google Scholar. The study derives several benefits from using academic and government database to complete this study. First, the study has been able to locate large volume of data quickly and cheaply to complete the study. Moreover, the study uses academic and government database to locate high quality data to complete the research.

Analysis

The paper uses several strategies to carry out the data analysis. First, the study searches for data from the premium academic database that contains only the quality research paper. All the data collected from the database are tailored to the research study. Moreover, the study handpicks some research papers completed by the authorities in the civilian and military aircraft. To identify quality research papers from academic and government database, the study uses the relevant keywords to search for data. Using the appropriate keywords, the researcher has been able to sort out appropriate quality data relevant to the study. The data analysis assists the researcher to deliver valid research findings.

Findings

Analysis of similar studies reveals that organizational influence has been the major human factor that affects civilian and aircraft incidents at the ground level. It is essential to realize that organization influence has been the major human factor that leads to all sorts of human errors. The upper-level management generally influences supervisory practice and skill acquisition within an organization.

However, the research findings show that organization influence leading to the skilled-based errors is more pronounced in civilian aircraft than the military aircraft. Data in the Table 2 and Fig 1 reveal that the skilled-based errors in the U.S. Army is 50% while the skilled-based errors in General Aviation is 80%. Overall average of skilled-based error that occurs in the civilian aviation is 70% while the overall average of skilled-based error in the military aviation is 52.5%.

Table 2: Skilled-Based Errors leading to the Civilian vs. Military Aircraft Incidents

CIVILIAN

General Aviation

80%

Commercial Schedule

60%

Commercial Non-Schedule

70%

Average

70%

MILITARY

US Army

50%

US Naval Helo

40%

US Naval TACAIR

60%

USAF TACAIR

60%

Average

52.5%

Source: Shappell & Wiegmann (2004)

Fig 1: Skilled-Based Errors leading to the Civilian vs. Military Aircraft Incidents

Analysis of the aircraft incidents from skilled-based errors shows that percentages of aircraft incidents from the skilled-based errors is higher in the civilian aircraft than the military aircraft. Typically, largest percentages of skilled-based errors are identified within the General Aviation. The findings show that personnel in the General Aviation does not receive effective training program to address the skilled-based errors. Thus, personnel within the General Aviation do not receive substantial level of training program compared to aircraft personnel of Commercial Aviation. Comparative analysis of skilled-based errors of civilian and military aircraft reveals that the percentage of the skilled-based errors in the civilian aviation is higher than the military aviation. The findings reveal that the military personnel are receiving more training program than the civilian personnel within the aviation sector. Since the occurrence of September 11, 2001 in the United States, the United States government is pumping more funds on defense to safeguard the American territorial integrity. Thus, the government is increasingly enhancing the training program of military personnel to address various human factors that could lead to the military aircraft incidents in the United States. (Stanton, Rafferty, & Blane, 2012).