26.12.2012 Views

Scientific and Technical Aerospace Reports Volume 38 July 28, 2000

Scientific and Technical Aerospace Reports Volume 38 July 28, 2000

Scientific and Technical Aerospace Reports Volume 38 July 28, 2000

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

8<br />

03<br />

AIR TRANSPORTATION AND SAFETY<br />

�������� ��������� ��� ����� ��� ��������� ����������� �������� ������ ����������� ������ ��������� �������� ��� �������� ����������<br />

������� ��� �������� �������� �� ������ ���������� �� �������� ��� �� ������� ������������ ��� ������� �� �� �������� ��� �������<br />

���������� ������ ��� ������� ������� �� ������� �� �� �������� �������������� ��� ����������� ��� ������� ����������� ��� ���� �� �����<br />

�������������� ��� ������� ��� �� ���������� ����������� ��� ������� ���������������<br />

<strong>2000</strong>0062019 NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA USA<br />

Comparison of Pilots’ Situational Awareness While Monitoring Autol<strong>and</strong> Approaches Using Conventional <strong>and</strong> Advanced<br />

Flight Display Formats<br />

Kramer, Lynda J., NASA Langley Research Center, USA; Busquets, Anthony M., NASA Langley Research Center, USA; May<br />

<strong>2000</strong>; 125p; In English; Original contains color illustrations<br />

Contract(s)/Grant(s): RTOP 522-19-11-01<br />

Report No.(s): NASA/TP-<strong>2000</strong>-210<strong>28</strong>4; NAS 1.60:210<strong>28</strong>4; L-17981; No Copyright; Avail: CASI; A06, Hardcopy; A02, Microfiche<br />

A simulation experiment was performed to assess situation awareness (SA) <strong>and</strong> workload of pilots while monitoring simulated<br />

autol<strong>and</strong> operations in Instrument Meteorological Conditions with three advanced display concepts: two enhanced electronic<br />

flight information system (EFIS)-type display concepts <strong>and</strong> one totally synthetic, integrated pictorial display concept. Each<br />

concept incorporated sensor-derived wireframe runway <strong>and</strong> iconic depictions of sensor-detected traffic in different locations on<br />

the display media. Various scenarios, involving conflicting traffic situation assessments, main display failures, <strong>and</strong> navigation/<br />

autopilot system errors, were used to assess the pilots’ SA <strong>and</strong> workload during autol<strong>and</strong> approaches with the display concepts.<br />

From the results, for each scenario, the integrated pictorial display concept provided the pilots with statistically equivalent or substantially<br />

improved SA over the other display concepts. In addition to increased SA, subjective rankings indicated that the pictorial<br />

concept offered reductions in overall pilot workload (in both mean ranking <strong>and</strong> spread) over the two enhanced EFIS-type display<br />

concepts. Out of the display concepts flown, the pilots ranked the pictorial concept as the display that was easiest to use to maintain<br />

situational awareness, to monitor an autol<strong>and</strong> approach, to interpret information from the runway <strong>and</strong> obstacle detecting sensor<br />

systems, <strong>and</strong> to make the decision to go around.<br />

Author<br />

Flight Simulation; Automatic Pilots; Display Devices; Workloads (Psychophysiology); Navigation Aids; Control Simulation;<br />

Guidance Sensors; Head-Up Displays<br />

<strong>2000</strong>006<strong>28</strong>44 National Transportation Safety Board, Washington, DC USA<br />

Aircraft Accident Report: Controlled Flight into Terrain Korean Air Flight 801, Boeing 747-300, HL7468, Nimitz Hill,<br />

Guam, August 6, 1997<br />

Jan. 13, <strong>2000</strong>; 222p; In English<br />

Report No.(s): AD-A377407; NTSB/AAR-00/01; No Copyright; Avail: CASI; A10, Hardcopy; A03, Microfiche<br />

On August 6, 1997, about 0142:26 Guam local time, Korean Air flight 801, a Boeing 747-3B5B (747-300), Korean registration<br />

11L7468, operated by Korean Air Company, Ltd., crashed at Nimitz Hill, Guam. Flight 801 departed from Kimpo International<br />

Airport, Seoul, Korea, with 2 pilots, 1 flight engineer, 14 flight attendants, <strong>and</strong> 237 passengers on board. The airplane had<br />

been cleared to l<strong>and</strong> on runway 6 Left at A.B. Won Guam International Airport, Agana, Guam, <strong>and</strong> crashed into high terrain about<br />

3 miles southwest of the airport. of the 254 persons on board, 2<strong>28</strong> were killed, <strong>and</strong> 23 passengers <strong>and</strong> 3 flight attendants survived<br />

the accident with serious injuries. The airplane was destroyed by impact forces <strong>and</strong> a postcrash fire. Flight 801 was operating in<br />

U.S. airspace as a regularly scheduled international passenger service flight under the Convention on International Civil Aviation<br />

<strong>and</strong> the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 129 <strong>and</strong> was on an instrument flight rules flight plan. The National<br />

Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of the Korean Air flight 801 accident was the captain’s failure<br />

to adequately brief <strong>and</strong> execute the nonprecision approach <strong>and</strong> the first officer’s <strong>and</strong> flight engineer’s failure to effectively monitor<br />

<strong>and</strong> cross-check the captain’s execution of the approach. Contributing to these failures were the captain’s fatigue <strong>and</strong> Korean Air’s<br />

inadequate flight crew training. Contributing to the accident was the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) intentional inhibition<br />

of the minimum safe altitude warning system (MSAW) at Guam <strong>and</strong> the agency’s failure to adequately manage the system.<br />

The safety issues in this report focus on flight crew performance, approach procedures, <strong>and</strong> pilot training; air traffic control,<br />

including controller performance <strong>and</strong> the intentional inhibition of the MSAW system at Guam; emergency response; the adequacy<br />

of Korean Civil Aviation Bureau (KCAB) <strong>and</strong> FAA over<br />

DTIC<br />

Aircraft Accidents; Pilot Error; Human Performance; Flight Crews; Education; Pilot Training

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!