Federal Aviation

Subcommittee on Administration

Human Factors 

Fall 2013 Review

By: Kathy Abbott

Date: July 30, 2013

Flightdeck/ Maintenance/ 

Systems Integration Human 

Factors
Federal Aviation

Administration

2

Presentation Outline

• TCRG/BLI Overview

– Emerging FY 16 focal areas

• Requirements Review

– FY 13 requirements 

– Primary focal areas FY 14-15

• HF-13-01: Flight Training Methods for Jet Upset Prevention, Detection 

and Recovery 

• HF-13-02: ADS-B Human Factors – AIR & AFS Equipment Design, 

Evaluation, and Operational Approval Guidance

• HF-13-03: A Multi-Disciplinary Approach to Fatigue Risk Management in 

Maintenance
Federal Aviation

Administration

3

BLI Portfolio Overview

• Purpose: Provide data to support evaluation criteria and methods, 

regulatory material, and recommended practices related to human 

factors for flight deck systems and applications/functions, 

flightcrew procedures, training, and operational use. Establish 

data to support risk management programs to address hazards in 

the maintenance environment. 

• Benefits: To reduce risks associated with human performance 

while ensuring safety in aviation operations and maintenance 

activities.

• Success: Results of research support development of standards, 

procedures, training, policy and other regulatory and guidance 

material as well as human factors assessments of technologies 

and procedures.
Federal Aviation

Administration

Core vs. NextGen

Core Projects NextGen Projects

Timeline Near-term Mid-term ( - 2020)

Research focus In the field today Anticipated in the field

Documentation Not in NextGen documents In NextGen documents

Example topics • Fatigue

• Maintenance

• Avionics -Today

• DataComm

• Instrument Procedures

• Avionics- Future

Project example 

(ADS-B)

• Industry survey (consumer reports)

• Symbology- ground vehicles

• ADS-B color-coding 

• CDTI operational evaluation 

for merging and spacing 

(with US Airways)

• In-trail procedure/FIM

literature review

4
Federal Aviation

Administration

FY13-FY16 Core Flight Deck Research 

Requirements Prioritization 

5

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Enhancing Aviation Safety Through Advanced 

Procedures, Training & Checking Methods, to 

include Jet Upset

50 22 36 

Human Factors Maintenance Risk Management 56 23 31 

Avionics & New Technologies: Certification and 

Operational Approval Criteria

57 - ADS-B

60 - Avionics 44 26 

Advanced Vision Systems (EFVS, EVS, SVS, and 

CVS), Head Up Displays (HUD), Head Mounted 

Displays (HMD): Certification and Operational 

Approval Criteria

36 29 

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Human Factors 

Considerations 34 23 

General Aviation Safety Improvement Research – A 

Multi-Method Approach to Accident Reduction 10

Human Factors R&D for Improved Rotorcraft 

Operational Safety 46 

Fatigue Mitigation in Flight Operations 
Federal Aviation

Administration

Why is Human Factors Important?

2/3 to 3/4 of all accidents continue to have pilot 

error as a primary factor...

Miracle on the Hudson

6

Asiana Airlines Flt. 214

• Complex Systems/ Automation 

• Human Error

• Avionics (Software & Hardware)

• Instrument Procedures

• Training

• Crew Resource Management

• Fatigue

• Maintenance
Federal Aviation

Administration

Human Factors Research Needs

Applicants Develop New:

1. Aircraft 

2. Aircraft Systems

3. Procedures

4. Training

5. Maintenance

Identify Issues:

• ACO Issue Papers

• Special Conditions

• Accident & Incidents

Research 

Needs

Human Factors AVS Research 

Application Process

Develop/Update 

Regulatory & 

Guidance Material

Conduct Research

7
Federal Aviation

Administration

Cessna Mustang

Rockwell Shrike Commander

When Will the Research be Completed?

8

As long as technology continues to evolve...

Wright Flyer (en.wikipedia.org)

...there will be human factors issues.

Beechcraft Starship
Why Are We Still Studying 

Symbology?

9
Symbology Research

1950 1986 1993 1997 2005 2007 2011 2013+

Initial 

Collision 

Avoidance 

Research

Aeromexico 

498 Midair 

Collision

1986

TCAS II Mandate

Fly-Over

Fly-By 

Symbology

Research

SAE G10 NAVAID

Research Symbols Published

Ugh!

Initial 

ADS-B 

Symbology 

Research

NAVAID

Symbology 

Research

Advanced 

Applications

ADS-B

Symbology 

Research 10
Federal Aviation

Administration

11

US Symbols

(NOAA)

ICAO 

Symbols

Fly-Over

Fly-By

Why Are We Still Studying 

Symbology?
Federal Aviation

Administration

• ADS-B

• Low Visibility Operatoins (LVO)

Information Type Symbols In Use

Clearance Bar

Geographic Position 

Marker (GPM)

ILS Hold Line

Non-Movement Area

Why Are We Still Studying 

Symbology?

12

DAC Gen-X EFB

Information Type Symbols In Use

Traffic Aircraft

Ground Vehicles
Federal Aviation

Administration

13

HF FY2013 Approved Requirements

HF-13-01: Flight Training Methods for Jet Upset Prevention, 

Detection and Recovery 

HF-13-02: ADS-B Human Factors – AIR & AFS Equipment Design, 

Evaluation, and Operational Approval Guidance

HF-13-03: A Multi-Disciplinary Approach to Fatigue Risk 

Management in Maintenance
Federal Aviation

Administration

• To develop recommendations for the content, 

strategy and training interval for jet upset training 

so pilots can interpret the signs of the onset of jet 

upset and respond before upset occurs

• Identify mitigations for startle, surprise, and 

distraction

• Output: Input to LOC Aviation Rulemaking 

Committee

• Sponsor: Sponsor: Kathy Abbott (AVS), Rob 

Burke (AFS-210), Doug Farrow, (AFS-230)

HF-13-01: Flight Training Methods for Jet Upset 

Prevention, Detection and Recovery 

14

FY 2013 Accomplishment/Issues

Research Requirement Execution of the Requirement

Out Year Funding Requirements

• Performer: MIT Lincoln Labs/University of Central 

Florida

• Start Date: Research ongoing from FY12 

requirement (initiated June 2012)

• Current status: Green

• Review of the learning objectives proposed by 

ICATEE and ARC and identify the minimum set 

of maneuvers required for teaching the learning 

objectives proposed. 

• Complete literature review on surprise, startle, 

and distraction for unexpected events

FY 13 FY 14 FY 15 FY 16 FY 17

$ 360 $ 1,000 $ 500 TBD TBD

Note: Funding for outyears (FY15+) is for planning purposes only.
Federal Aviation

Administration

Flight Control

& 

Mech Systems

Terminal

Area

Safety

Human

Factors

Possible new

stall criteria

Evaluation

of NASA 

stall model

Generalization 

of NASA stall 

model

Model validation

against accident

and flight data

Proposed 

“representative” 

model description 

from National 

Simulator Program

Selection of 

“representative” 

or “type-specific” 

real-time model

Content, 

strategy, and 

interval for 

upset training

Upset Recovery Research – Relationship Among TCRGs

Courtesy Dr. Jeffery Schroeder
Federal Aviation

Administration

HF-13-01: Flight Training Methods for Jet Upset 

Prevention, Detection and Recovery

16

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY2016

Identify learning objectives for jet upset detection 

and recovery 

Define training scenarios and performance 

standards 

Support development and testing of new models to 

increase the flight envelope that can be simulated 

with current technologies (with AFS-400)

 

Identify a set of tasks for teaching learning objectives 

for upset recovery training 

Develop and validate specific performance 

standards for these tasks 

Develop recommendations and training guidelines 

from results of AFS-400 simulator model research for 

use by the FAA and industry 

Jet Upset Prevention, Detection, and Recovery/Loss of Control
Federal Aviation

Administration

HF-13-01: Flight Training Methods for Jet Upset 

Prevention, Detection and Recovery

17

Mitigations for Startle, Surprise, and Distraction

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY2016

Literature review with definitions and on state-of-theart of mitigations for surprise, startle, and distraction 

(1st draft)

 

Research plan identifying research gaps 

Conduct research 

Develop recommendations for mitigations 

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY2016

Analyze training systems (traditional and AQP 

training) to identify strengths and weaknesses. 

Consider training for crew resource management.



Gather data on the lessons learned with the 

implementation of the ICAO MPL standards and 

identify strengths and weaknesses



Conduct literature review to identify training issues 

and to determine whether guidance is needed to 

train when pilots need to override or intervene in 

aircraft systems with hard protection.



Other activities
Federal Aviation

Administration

HF-13-02: ADS-B Human Factors – AIR & AFS Equipment 

Design, Evaluation, and Operational Approval Guidance

18

FY 2013 Accomplishment/Issues

Research Requirement Execution of the Requirement

Out Year Funding Requirements

• To provide a capability for FAA Certification and Flight 

Standards personnel to evaluate traffic displays and 

traffic applications/ operations that use ADS-B 

technology. 

• Output: State of knowledge for current CDTI design 

and use; key safety-related design issues and 

tradeoffs; shortcomings of current guidance; current 

ADS-B display systems (avionics inventory) 

• Sponsor: C. Swider, AIR-120; D. Walker, AIR-130; P. 

Zelechoski, AFS-400

• Reports will be provided to the AVS sponsor who 

will extract key information, issues, and guidance 

for inclusion in the appropriate regulatory and 

guidance material for the specific avionics system 

 Summary of CDTI operational evaluation 

support and lessons learned from operational 

trials

 Draft ADS-B industry survey

FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17

$ 523 -- $ 880 TBD TBD

• Performer: US DOT Volpe Center

• Start Date: Research ongoing from requirement 

HF-11-05, Avionics & New Technologies: 

Certification and Operational Approval Criteria

• Current status: Green

In FY15, ADS-B Human Factors project is combined with the 

Avionics research requirement.

Note: Funding for outyears (FY15+) is for planning purposes only.
Federal Aviation

Administration

HF-13-02: ADS-B Human Factors – AIR & AFS Equipment 

Design, Evaluation, and Operational Approval Guidance

19

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY2016

Conduct symbolology research for airport surface 

moving maps, ADS-B/CDTI   

Summary of CDTI operational evaluation support and 

lessons learned from operational trials 

Develop guidance for AVS to evaluate human 

factors/pilot interface issues with ADS-B alerting 

CDTI Industry Survey 

Issues paper & Incident/accident analysis 

ADS-B/CDTI
Federal Aviation

Administration

Other Avionics Projects

20

Airport Surface Moving Maps, EFBs

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Conduct analysis of incident/ accident data for 

airport surface moving maps and EFBs 

Conduct analysis of taxiway distances to identify 

map/database accuracy requirements. 

Update to Volpe document “Human Factors 

Considerations for the Design and Evaluation of 

Electronic Flight Bags, Version 3” 

 

Report on HF integration issues with tablet (e.g., 

iPad) technology in the flight deck 

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Glass flight deck industry product report 

Glass Flight Deck

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Review & update General Guidance document  

Continue to develop an evaluation guide that 

complements the General Guidance document for 

Part 23, 25, 27, and 29 aircraft

  

General Guidance that cuts across Avionics/Aircraft Types
Federal Aviation

Administration

21

HF-13-03: A Multi-Disciplinary Approach to Fatigue 

Risk Management in Maintenance

FY 2013 Accomplishment/Issues

Research Requirement

Out Year Funding Requirements

• Review and develop specialized tools for 

fatigue risk management

• Explore utility of operationally usable sensor 

technology and integration with existing 

Fatigue Risk Management Systems

• Collect data from workgroup members to 

assess changes as a result of FRMS 

implementation

• Sponsor: Bill Johnson/Ken Kerzner, AFS-300

• Supplemental report with specialized guidelines 

for fatigue risk management

• Report on practical viability and costs associated 

with emerging fatigue assessment technologies

• Report on the effectiveness of FRMS operations

• All research will contribute to development of 

Advisory Circulars and other formal FAA 

documents available not only to FAA inspectors 

and organizations but also to operators, 

manufacturers, maintenance service providers 

and others

FY 13 FY 14 FY 15 FY 16 FY 17

$ 257 $ 296 $ 1,200 TBD TBD

Note: Funding for outyears (FY15+) is for planning purposes only.

Execution of the Requirement

• Performer: CAMI

• Start Date: Research ongoing from FY11 

research requirement 

• Current status: Green
Federal Aviation

Administration

HF-13-03: A Multi-Disciplinary Approach to Fatigue 

Risk Management in Maintenance

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY2016

Review and develop specialized tools for fatigue risk 

management    

Explore utility of operationally usable sensor 

technology and integration with existing Fatigue Risk 

Management Systems

 

Collect data from workgroup members to assess 

changes as a result of FRMS implementation   

Determine contributing factors related to “failure to 

use technical documentation.”   

Line Oriented Safety Assessment   

22
Federal Aviation

Administration

FY 13 - FY 16 Core Flight Deck Research 

Requirements: Focal Areas

23

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Enhancing Aviation Safety Through Advanced 

Procedures, Training & Checking Methods, to 

include Jet Upset

   

Human Factors Maintenance Risk Management    

Avionics & New Technologies: Certification and 

Operational Approval Criteria   

Advanced Vision Systems (EFVS, EVS, SVS, and 

CVS), Head Up Displays (HUD), Head Mounted 

Displays (HMD): Certification and Operational 

Approval Criteria

 

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Human Factors 

Considerations  

General Aviation Safety Improvement Research – A 

Multi-Method Approach to Accident Reduction 

Human Factors R&D for Improved Rotorcraft 

Operational Safety  

Fatigue Mitigation in Flight Operations 