# Presentation: 149803

- Exit Route Identification

- IISU Project
- N. de Beler

## IISU Objective

- Improve **identification **of **usable** exits and passengers **guidance**

**Plan evacuation**

**Launch evacuation **

**Guide passengers**

**Identify exits condition**

## IISU Consorsium

## Work breakdown

- Requirements analysis

- Assistant tools Specification

- Technologies research

- Solution(s) proposition

- Experiment; IISU 2 in 2002

- Non technical Solution(s)

- We are here

## Requirements analysis

- Previous studies
- CAA database
- Interviews
- Training centre visit
- JAR

- Evacuations typology
- Occupants tasks modelling

## Survivable events analysis (1)

- 256 of the 2426 accidents** (about 10.5%) **involved an evacuation
**Evacuation situations**:** **
*Evacuation involving ****fire or smoke**** are the most frequent (53% of the 256 accidents). *
***Approach or landing**** represent the phases of flight the most concerned with an evacuation (52% of the 256 accidents)*
**Non-usability**** **of the exits is related to:
*Difficulty/impossibility to open an exit*
*Obstacle or fire or water behind the door*
*Problem with the slides (problem of inflation, fire, split, etc...)*

## Survivable events analysis (2)

**Temporal factor**:** **Majority of evacuations are unplanned (no time to prepare cabin)** **
**Evacuation decision making process**:*** ***critical phase** **
**Rule on the exits usability:**** **CC role
- An exit can be usable only** ****part of the time of the evacuation**
**Communication problem****: **means failure, noise, impossibility to move
**Passengers pre-flight briefing:**** **influences passengers’ behaviour** **
**Passengers guidance:**
*Guidance towards an exit is a serious problem in case of smoke,*
*Passengers dangerous behaviour due to panic *
*Re-routing of passengers because of unusable exits*
*Problem related to emergency equipment in case of ditching*

## Tasks model

## Interest of a Hierarchical task model

- Make clear** the goal **of each activity
**Guide the need analysis**
*Formalise the links between actors*
*Stress the links between tasks *
*Understand the information used *
*Stress the influence of psychological and cultural factors *
- Offer a **synthetic view** of the occupants activity
- Offer a **framework** to describe the results of evacuation reports analysis

** ****Rich support to formalise the requirements ****taking account of the activity context**

## From the need analysis to the solution

- Decide Evacuation
- Understand situation
- Prepare evacuation
- Order evacuation
- Decide usable exits
- Guide passengers

- Tasks to be improved

- Related Requirements

- Solutions

- Data Access
- Data transmission
- Co ordination
- Passengers Briefing
- Guidance
- Procedures
- Training
- Emergency equipment

- CHECK
- CAMERA
- HEADSET
- SOUND
- SPYHOLE

- Training
- Procedures

## Identification of solutions 

- CHECK: for CC, be informed about the usability of all exits, assist passengers guidance, improve flow management.
- CAMERA: Check external conditions, provide information on slide usability?
- HEADSET: Improve interaction between CC& FC members; be informed about the usability of another exit; know if a CC or FC is operational or not; improve flow management.
- SOUND: Assist the guidance of passengers mainly in deteriorated situation (smoke, baggage in the aisle)
- SPYHOLE: Improve external conditions checking (widened vision)

## CHECK: CHeck Exit and Comunicate Knowledge

- At each main door:
- Display: overview of all exits usability
- 2 modes: usable ; non usable
- commands:
*By default, automatic usable status **when slide inflated*
*Manual command to input **non usable / usable status*

- 

- 

##  Next step 

- Finalise the « instruments » specification**:**
*impact on CC**** procedures, training***
*impact on**** regulation***
- Propose** **non technical solution** **replying to the requirements: change in** CC procedure & training; FC and CC common training; **Change in** passengers briefing.**
**Experiments**** **on realistic simulator (Cranfield)** => IISU 2**

## Conclusion: 3 outcomes

- Identification of solutions that are « reasonable » in terms of implementation** feasibility****, ****cost**** **and amount of** ****change**
- Benefits of the use of the** ****tasks modelling**** **methodology to analyse the needs :** **provide** ****traceability**.
- Identification of tasks that need** ****further investigations**** **
*evacuation decision process, *
*passengers awareness of the safety role of CC, *
*passengers briefing.*