Touch screen technology in flight deck — How far is it helpful?

Author(s):  
S. Kaminani
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Michelle Yeh ◽  
Joseph Jaworski ◽  
Stephanie Chase

The purpose of this study was to gather usability data on a new flight deck concept in which pilots are shown certified and uncertified information concurrently on installed avionics. Specifically, we wanted to examine perceptions on the concepts of concurrent use and differentiation for electronic flight bag (EFB) applications that show ownship position. We presented an uncertified electronic chart on either a portable electronic device (PED) alone (off to the pilot’s side) or on both a PED and an installed flight deck display. The uncertified electronic chart was always shown concurrently with an approved navigation source. We differentiated the electronic chart from the navigation information via display medium (portable vs. installed) and a header labeled “EFB,” drawn at the top of the uncertified electronic chart on the installed display. Thirteen flightcrews flew eight scenarios using the flight deck concept. Pilots liked the concurrent display of the electronic chart, and the repeated display functionality, in particular, because they could control the presentation of information on the forward display using the touch screen on the side display. Our method of differentiation—a header—was less successful and suggests a need to consider the potential for stimulus habituation when evaluating these techniques.


Author(s):  
Stefano Bonelli ◽  
Linda Napoletano

This chapter presents and discusses an Expert Usability Evaluation for a flight deck touch screen prototype, carried out in one European co-funded project called ALICIA (www.alicia-project.eu). Through the presentation of this evaluation activity and its impact on the rest of design process, this chapter will address some methodological issues on usability in complex domains: 1) The specific context in which the technology is introduced has to be well known by the designers as it provides crucial constraints to be taken into account; 2) Evaluating complex safety critical systems entails the use of a holistic multidisciplinary approach and an iterative design process that involve, in different phases, several type of experts (engineers, human factors, usability experts, end users and stakeholders); and 3) The level of maturity of the technology and the evaluation objectives contribute to the definition of the evaluation methods to be used.


2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 113-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephanie Chow ◽  
Stephen Yortsos ◽  
Najmedin Meshkati

This article focuses on a major human factors–related issue that includes the undeniable role of cultural factors and cockpit automation and their serious impact on flight crew performance, communication, and aviation safety. The report concentrates on the flight crew performance of the Boeing 777–Asiana Airlines Flight 214 accident, by exploring issues concerning mode confusion and autothrottle systems. It also further reviews the vital role of cultural factors in aviation safety and provides a brief overview of past, related accidents. Automation progressions have been created in an attempt to design an error-free flight deck. However, to do that, the pilot must still thoroughly understand every component of the flight deck – most importantly, the automation. Otherwise, if pilots are not completely competent in terms of their automation, the slightest errors can lead to fatal accidents. As seen in the case of Asiana Flight 214, even though engineering designs and pilot training have greatly evolved over the years, there are many cultural, design, and communication factors that affect pilot performance. It is concluded that aviation systems designers, in cooperation with pilots and regulatory bodies, should lead the strategic effort of systematically addressing the serious issues of cockpit automation, human factors, and cultural issues, including their interactions, which will certainly lead to better solutions for safer flights.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document