Citation

Kirwan B. Safety Sci. 2001; 37(2-3): 151-185.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2001, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

This paper considers the role of the controller in future Air Traffic Management (ATM), an industry which is undergoing considerable and rapid change at this time. In particular, the paper focuses on the area of allocation of function, i.e. the determination of what the (human) controller should do, what the hardware and software (machine) should do, and what tasks they should share, and who (or what) is in control, in this increasingly complex system. The premise of the paper is that traditional criteria for allocation of function, so-called Fitts List approaches, are no longer clear-cut to apply, if they ever were. Technology is reaching the point where many traditionally human functions and roles can be supported or even completely autonomously carried out by automated systems. The question is quite simple -- what functions, roles, and even responsibilities should be automated? This question is becoming an imperative in currently accelerating technologies such as ATM. As an example, aviation saw a huge insurgence of automation into the cockpit, with four generations of so-called glass cockpit designs, culminating in aircraft which are completely fly-by-wire, and where some aircraft have envelope protection such that the pilot's control actions are monitored and may be overridden by the machine. However, this transition from largely manual flight to glass-cockpit control was not without problems and automation-assisted accidents, and the air traffic industry would do well to avoid such problems. ATM is an area that has been relatively non-automated for the past 30 years. But as traffic levels continue to rise rapidly, there is general agreement that ATM systems must adopt some level(s) of automation support in order to maintain safety and efficiency of air traffic operations. However, ATM development is currently also highly technology-driven, perhaps with most emphasis on what technology can do for us, rather than what we need it to do. From a human factors perspective, the question of what we need from technology and automation is the critical one. As technology continues to accelerate, it is probable that it will be able to deliver whatever functions we wish it to. It is therefore appropriate to consider what the role of the human should be. If such considerations are not made now, then accelerating technology and traffic levels, and the need for ATM systems that can cope, will deliver systems which, if they fail, will lead to the types of negative experiences and fatal accidents that the aviation world has already experienced. Quite simply, if the role of the human is not considered now, it will be too late to consider it. Furthermore, if this occurs, then future as yet unforseen automation-assisted accidents will inevitably be attributed to human error. This paper considers some of the factors and issues surrounding the difficult area of automation and allocation of function, and gives an example of one method, based on error analysis, which has been used to try to answer some of the difficult automation questions currently facing ATM and human factors.