noss: the methodology and early findings chris henry the university of texas human factors research...
TRANSCRIPT
NOSS: The Methodology and Early Findings
Chris HenryThe University of Texas Human Factors Research Project
The University of Texas at Austin
The University’s RoleThe University’s Role
Member of the ICAO NOSS Study GroupMember of the ICAO NOSS Study Group Jointly conducted the first two trials of Jointly conducted the first two trials of
the NOSS methodology with Airservices the NOSS methodology with Airservices Australia and Airways New Zealand.Australia and Airways New Zealand.
NOSS Operating NOSS Operating CharacteristicsCharacteristics
1.1. Over-the-shoulder observations during normal shifts Over-the-shoulder observations during normal shifts 2.2. Joint Management/Union sponsorshipJoint Management/Union sponsorship3.3. Voluntary participationVoluntary participation4.4. De-identified, confidential, and non-disciplinary data De-identified, confidential, and non-disciplinary data
collectioncollection5.5. Specifically designed form for collection of dataSpecifically designed form for collection of data6.6. Trained and calibrated observersTrained and calibrated observers7.7. Trusted data collection sitesTrusted data collection sites8.8. Data cleaning processData cleaning process9.9. Targets for safety enhancementTargets for safety enhancement10.10. Feedback results to the controllersFeedback results to the controllers
ThreatsThreats Threat: An event or error that occurs Threat: An event or error that occurs
outside the influence of the controller, outside the influence of the controller, but which requires their attention and but which requires their attention and management if safety margins are to be management if safety margins are to be maintained. maintained.
1.1. Air Navigation Service Provider (Internal) Air Navigation Service Provider (Internal)
ThreatsThreats
2.2. Air Traffic Control – Pilot Interaction ThreatsAir Traffic Control – Pilot Interaction Threats
3.3. Environmental ThreatsEnvironmental Threats
Threats
Threat CategoriesAir Navigation Service
Provider (Internal) Threats
Airborne ThreatsEnvironmental
Threats
Examples
Errors by other controllers
Similar call signs Adverse weather
Unserviceable equipment
Language difficulty Airspace design
ProceduresA/C flying unassigned
headingRestricted Airspace
Coordination issuePilot not responding to
callTraffic mix
Computer malfunction Other pilot errors Turbulence
ErrorsErrors
Error: An observed deviation from Error: An observed deviation from organizational expectations or controller organizational expectations or controller intentions intentions • Communication ErrorsCommunication Errors• Procedural ErrorsProcedural Errors• Equipment / Automation ErrorsEquipment / Automation Errors• Traffic Handling ErrorsTraffic Handling Errors
ErrorsErrors
Error Categories Communication ProceduralEquipment / Computer
Traffic Handling
Examples
Phraseology
Readback / Hearback
error
Missed call
Coordination error
Checklist
Briefing error
Aircraft transfer
Flight progress strip error
Did not check RWY prior to issuing TO clearance
AC label inaccurate info
Communication system
manipulation
Radar screen range selection
Late decent
Incorrect clearance instruction
No altitude instruction
Undesired StatesUndesired States
Controller Console Controller Console Setup US’sSetup US’s Inaccurate Inaccurate
representation of representation of traffictraffic
Traffic situation not Traffic situation not being monitoredbeing monitored
Incomplete handoverIncomplete handover
Traffic State US’sTraffic State US’s Separation not Separation not
assured assured RWY/TXY not verified RWY/TXY not verified
to be clear for to be clear for progressprogress
NOSS Trial DataNOSS Trial DataNOSS trialsNOSS trials LOSA archiveLOSA archive
Threats per observationThreats per observation 5.75.7 3.73.7Errors per observationErrors per observation 2.62.6 2.62.6Undesired States per Undesired States per observationobservation 0.60.6 0.50.5Percentage of Percentage of observations with an observations with an internal threatinternal threat
88%88% 63%63%
Percentage of Percentage of observations with observations with pilot/ATC interaction pilot/ATC interaction threatsthreats
87%87% 54%54%
Percentage of Percentage of observations with observations with environmental environmental (common) threats(common) threats
78%78% 75%75%
Preliminary FindingsPreliminary Findings
Greater threat prevalence of internal Greater threat prevalence of internal and ATC/pilot interactions when and ATC/pilot interactions when compared to LOSAcompared to LOSA
A few pilot – ATC interaction issuesA few pilot – ATC interaction issues Similar call signsSimilar call signs Readback / phraseology issuesReadback / phraseology issues
Methodological ChallengesMethodological Challenges Will it work in the various ATC Will it work in the various ATC
environments?environments? Focus on positionsFocus on positions
ConcernsConcerns1)1) Observability: A similar number of observable Observability: A similar number of observable
errors are seen in NOSS and LOSAerrors are seen in NOSS and LOSA2)2) Lack of proceduralization / standardization: Lack of proceduralization / standardization:
There may be reason to compare There may be reason to compare organizations with different proceduresorganizations with different procedures
What’s Next?What’s Next?
NOSS & LOSA: What can each add to the NOSS & LOSA: What can each add to the other?other?
Reliability and validity studies in Reliability and validity studies in conjunction with FAAconjunction with FAA
NAV CANADA NOSS area/terminal trial NAV CANADA NOSS area/terminal trial Airservices Australia tower trialAirservices Australia tower trial Fully operational NOSS in 2006? Fully operational NOSS in 2006?
Airservices?Airservices?
