This paper examines fatigue as a critical safety threat in both military and civilian aviation. Drawing on a wide range of academic studies, military reports, and experimental findings, it investigates the physiological, psychological, and environmental causes of pilot fatigue — including sleep deprivation, high-altitude hypoxia, and circadian rhythm disruption. The paper identifies three distinct fatigue types — subjective, objective, and physiological — and discusses why their complex interactions make the phenomenon difficult to measure. Solutions examined include sleep management, strategic napping, exercise, pharmacological countermeasures such as dextroamphetamine, and increasing cockpit automation. The paper concludes that while no single solution is sufficient, adequate sleep management remains the most effective countermeasure, and that greater industry-wide attention to aircrew scheduling is urgently needed.
Fatigue is a factor that is being increasingly seen as a threat and a problem in both the aviation industry and the Air Force. In financial terms, it has been estimated that problems caused by fatigue cost American industry more than $18 billion a year in lost productivity (Military Aviation Fatigue Countermeasures Workshop).
Numerous studies have shown that there is a direct correlation between fatigue and aviation accidents. "There is mounting evidence that pilot/aircrew fatigue is a causative factor in many civilian and military aviation mishaps" (ibid). There is also a long history of accidents that have been positively linked to fatigue in aviation. For example, fatigue has been cited as a causative factor in the Korean Air Flight 801 disaster of 1997, in which 228 people were killed. Furthermore, fatigue has been identified as a contributing cause in 9.6% of all Air Force Class A mishaps over the past 30 years, and aircrew fatigue has been associated with approximately four percent of all Army Class A–C accidents during the period from 1990 to 2000.
These statistics and other supporting data indicate the seriousness with which fatigue as a causative factor in aviation errors is being taken by modern researchers. This has resulted in an increasing emphasis on research into the causes of fatigue and the preventative measures that can be taken to combat fatigue-related errors in aviation. This is particularly important in military operations, where there is growing emphasis on the prevention of combat fatigue. The then-Defense Secretary of the United States promoted a policy to reduce air mishaps by 50% within two years (ibid).
Fatigue in aviation is also being recognized throughout the world as an important safety factor, as the following report attests: airline pilots have called for an urgent investigation after it was revealed that crews who fall asleep in the cockpit are responsible for up to one in twelve plane crashes. The British Air Line Pilots Association (BALPA) has demanded more research into flight-deck fatigue and an overturning of European legislation that allows airlines to make pilots fly longer with shorter breaks ("One in Twelve Plane," 2005, p. 26).
The phenomenon of fatigue has a number of central characteristics that have been emphasized by researchers and psychologists. "Fatigue is characterized by (1) a decreased capacity for work, known as work decrement; (2) modifications in the physiological state of the individual; and (3) a feeling of weariness" (Bartley, Chute & Ivy, 1947, p. 6). Fatigue also results from prolonged working hours and produces measurable changes in the body and other aspects of physiology.
Feelings of weariness are "the subjective sign of deep-seated bodily changes and decreased capacity for work which characterize fatigue. The feeling of fatigue may be accompanied by irritability, anxiety, excessive worry, [and] disturbed emotional states of all kinds" (Bartley, Chute & Ivy, 1947, p. 6).
This paper provides an overview of the problem and discusses the meaning and importance of fatigue as it relates to aviation accidents and mishaps. The definition and understanding of fatigue as both a physiological and psychological issue will be addressed. The paper also provides an intensive discussion of research tests and experiments that have been conducted in these areas, in order to present a comprehensive view of the latest strategies for alleviating fatigue-related problems.
The central method used in this paper was to research and compile results, views, and findings on the subject from a variety of database and data sources. Sources and studies on fatigue, focusing on the impact of fatigue on aviation and aviation accidents in the Air Force, were researched first. These sources included Internet databases as well as offline and online academic journals, magazines, and books that offered insight into the issue of fatigue within the parameters described.
While it was found that there was a plethora of data relating to the effects of fatigue in general, the issue of fatigue as it relates specifically to aviation was not as prolific. However, it was noticed during the research process that there were considerably more reports and studies on the subject published during the past decade.
These data sources were then analyzed and used as a basis for an overview — first of the causes and reasons for fatigue, and second to discuss the various views and facts relating to the way in which fatigue is linked to operational situations. The focus was on the prevention of fatigue in the Air Force, particularly under combat conditions. An attempt was also made to maintain a balance between studies presenting positive and negative implications of fatigue.
The results obtained from an investigation and analysis of these various sources overwhelmingly indicate that there is a significant problem to be addressed with regard to acute fatigue. Tests and research show that while fatigue is not always a factor influencing judgment errors, it has been conclusively demonstrated that fatigue is a major factor in aviation errors.
The research also suggests that the problem is being taken very seriously by the Air Force and the aviation industry, as evidenced by the numerous papers, studies, and seminars on the subject. Studies also suggest various methods of dealing with the problem, as outlined in the following section. The results of these investigations further point to the fact that fatigue is a complex issue that cannot be understood or addressed in isolation from other concomitant factors, such as stress. Solutions to the problem of fatigue are therefore dependent on a full and wide-ranging assessment of the phenomenon.
A comprehensive and in-depth understanding of fatigue requires that various related and concomitant factors be taken into account. This has been realized especially by researchers concerned with improving the accident rate in the Air Force as a result of fatigue. The importance of adequate performance during combat and wartime situations is a central concern for the military, and researchers have recognized a complex interrelationship between fatigue and factors such as stress and sleep deprivation.
Other factors — including the environment and the physiological effects of altitude — must also be included in any assessment of the nature of fatigue. Reviews of the literature show that "this relation is complex, involving characteristics of the individual (e.g., restedness, skill level, motivation), task variables (e.g., type, duration, repetitiveness), and the environment (e.g., temperature, altitude, noise)" (Neri & Shappell, 1994, p. 141).
There have been numerous attempts and studies, both in the field and in simulated experiments, to determine the degree of performance degradation due to fatigue and sleep deprivation. The results from these studies have often been mixed and sometimes ambiguous. For example, a study by Fraser (1952) showed significant vigilance degradation in aircrew after long flights, and Haslam (1981) also detected vigilance degradation with sleep loss. Another study demonstrated that "performance in a simulator was significantly degraded for transport crews given only onboard rest after flying 8- to 9-hour missions" (Neri & Shappell, 1994, p. 142).
However, other reports indicate that fatigue as a result of sleep deprivation is not always a certain or critical factor. "The magnitude of performance degradation after partial, or even total, sleep deprivation is often small (Johnson & Naitoh, 1974; Krueger, Armstrong, & Cisco, 1985). Furthermore, subjective feelings of fatigue can be inconsistent with performance (Holding, 1983), sometimes exhibiting a greater sensitivity to sleep loss than the performance measures (Haslam, 1981)" (Neri & Shappell, 1994, p. 142).
While different studies have produced variable results about the effects of fatigue-inducing elements on flight performance and aviation errors, there is general agreement among researchers that fatigue is a negative factor in aviation, particularly in military operations. "Despite the mixed findings, there is agreement on the importance of adequate sleep management and sleep logistics for military troops in wartime" (ibid).
Researchers also point out that the varying results obtained from studies are related to the type of experiments and the conditions under which testing takes place. They note that the most reliable data on the true effects of fatigue are often obtained from actual combat situations, while results from simulations and laboratory experiments may not accurately reflect the reality of fatigue-induced errors in operational aviation (ibid).
The exact nature of fatigue is a contentious issue among many researchers, with considerable debate about the interrelationship between different types and definitions of fatigue. These include:
Objective fatigue refers to changes in the level of aviation performance expressed as decreased capacity for work, typically measured using the finger ergograph (Bartley, Chute & Ivy, 1947, p. 7).
Physiological fatigue refers to "the physiological changes due to the chemical products of fatigue" and the metabolic rate of energy consumption, which "measures this real basis of physical fatigue and also mental fatigue in so far as it can be determined physiologically" (ibid).
Subjective fatigue is a more psychological concept related to ennui, weariness, and boredom (ibid). All three definitions are not mutually exclusive and must be considered together in any overall assessment of the effects of aviation fatigue.
The problem with measuring and assessing fatigue in terms of these three central definitions is that their interactions are not always constant, and each type of fatigue may operate independently of the others. As the following assessment explains:
"If any two of these three variables were correlated with one another the problem would be simplified, but as a matter of fact, each one is to a certain extent independent of every other. Neither subjective feeling nor output is highly correlated with physiological condition; nor are subjective feeling and output closely related. Output has a much less rapid decrement than subjective feeling. As a result of these discrepancies some psychologists, notably Muscio and Watson, have argued that the term fatigue is essentially ambiguous and should be eliminated from discussions of work and fatigue." (Bartley, Chute & Ivy, 1947)
In light of the above, it is clear that each type of fatigue and its associated variables must be considered both in isolation and in conjunction with one another in order for a comprehensive picture of fatigue to emerge.
"Altitude effects on the body and pilot performance"
"Pharmacological and non-pharmacological fatigue remedies"
The fight against fatigue has resulted in two general approaches to the problem: better management of situations and workload, and the use of controlled and tested drugs. However, sleep management is still the most obvious and effective path to the reduction of fatigue in pilots.
You’re 50% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.