Developing Proactive Methods for General Aviation Data Collection
Scott A. Shappell, Carla Hackworth, Kali Holcomb, John M. Lanicci, Massoud Bazargan, Jaclyn Baron, Rebecca Iden, Daniel J. Halperin
Abstract
Open-access reader
Scott A. Shappell, Carla Hackworth, Kali Holcomb, John M. Lanicci, Massoud Bazargan, Jaclyn Baron, Rebecca Iden, Daniel J. Halperin
Abstract
Open-access reader
Introduction. Over the last 20 years, nearly 40,000 general aviation (GA) aircraft were involved in accidents,\nroughly 20% of which were fatal. To address this safety concern, scientists have often relied on accident data.\nBecause of the rare nature of accidents, commercial aviation incident and near miss data may prove to be useful\nsources of safety information. In one such study, the National Transportation Safety Board interviewed GA\npilots that were flying near a weather-related accident in pursuit of a different perspective than that of the\naccident pilot. Interviewing GA pilots about their own weather-related event may provide similar benefits.\nMethod. To understand factors leading GA pilots to encounter adverse weather conditions, pilots involved in an\nadverse weather encounter were interviewed using a one-hour structured interview. The interview was developed\nusing surveys utilized by National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Federal Aviation\nAdministration (FAA). In total, 27 pilots who experienced an adverse weather encounter were interviewed, of\nwhich 25 were included in the final analysis.\nResults. Previous studies conducted by the FAA and others found many GA accidents involving flight into\nadverse weather were categorized as a willful disregard for the rules and regulations of safety; violations as defined\nby the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System. Contrary to what the accident record seems to\nsuggest, flight into adverse weather may also be influenced by the lack of appreciation/understanding of the\nhazards associated with adverse weather. Perhaps some encounters with adverse weather were motivated by\noutside influences or exacerbated by some manner of mechanical failure that may have led to the willful\nacceptance of unnecessary hazards.\nConclusions. These data suggest that current beliefs surrounding flight into adverse weather by GA pilots may be\nincomplete. The data presented here suggest that additional effort should be placed in training, both ab initio\nand recurrent. Emphasis should be placed on ensuring a full understanding of the adverse impact of weather,\nincluding the recognition of instrument meteorological conditions, icing, convective events, etc. Likewise, with\nthe proliferation of commercial weather products and on-board weather equipment, it may be time to move\ntoward some form of standard weather package that all pilots would review before flying.\n
OpenAlex reports 9 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Introduction. Over the last 20 years, nearly 40,000 general aviation (GA) aircraft were involved in accidents,\nroughly 20% of which were fatal. To address this safety concern, scientists have often relied on accident data.\nBecause of the rare nature of accidents, commercial aviation incident and near miss data may prove to be useful\nsources of safety information. In one such study, the National Transportation Safety Board interviewed GA\npilots that were flying near a weather-related accident in pursuit of a different perspective than that of the\naccident pilot. Interviewing GA pilots about their own weather-related event may provide similar benefits.\nMethod. To understand factors leading GA pilots to encounter adverse weather conditions, pilots involved in an\nadverse weather encounter were interviewed using a one-hour structured interview. The interview was developed\nusing surveys utilized by National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Federal Aviation\nAdministration (FAA). In total, 27 pilots who experienced an adverse weather encounter were interviewed, of\nwhich 25 were included in the final analysis.\nResults. Previous studies conducted by the FAA and others found many GA accidents involving flight into\nadverse weather were categorized as a willful disregard for the rules and regulations of safety; violations as defined\nby the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System. Contrary to what the accident record seems to\nsuggest, flight into adverse weather may also be influenced by the lack of appreciation/understanding of the\nhazards associated with adverse weather. Perhaps some encounters with adverse weather were motivated by\noutside influences or exacerbated by some manner of mechanical failure that may have led to the willful\nacceptance of unnecessary hazards.\nConclusions. These data suggest that current beliefs surrounding flight into adverse weather by GA pilots may be\nincomplete. The data presented here suggest that additional effort should be placed in training, both ab initio\nand recurrent. Emphasis should be placed on ensuring a full understanding of the adverse impact of weather,\nincluding the recognition of instrument meteorological conditions, icing, convective events, etc. Likewise, with\nthe proliferation of commercial weather products and on-board weather equipment, it may be time to move\ntoward some form of standard weather package that all pilots would review before flying.\n
Key concepts: Aviation, Interview, Aviation safety, Aviation accident, Aeronautics, Adverse weather, Extreme weather, Adverse effect