PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Man-machine interface and anomalies
View Single Post
Old 15th Apr 2012, 17:31
  #35 (permalink)  
RR_NDB
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Nearby SBBR and SDAM
Posts: 875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Anomalies

Hi,

TWO anomalies were present in F-GZCP:

1) Sensor anomaly (not capable to operate properly). A well know issue.

2) System anomaly (System was reconfigured by lack of redundancy in the design) Something the System "realized" immediately and never told properly (assertively and with the required clarity) to the crew. Instead the interface informed other issues to the crew. Actually we could never know what PF really received (inputs). RHS was not recorded.

Question:

There is a better way to deal with this kind of problems without relying on pilots capable to deal with external (induced by WX) and internal (inadequate processing of sensor anomalies)?

It's fair to require the pilots (not seasoned pilots) to manage and solve simultaneous anomalies in a rush? (through scan while simultaneously being required to aviate the plane sometimes in difficult conditions)

Or it's just a training issue? You teach the pilots on possible ways to "solve" consequences of anomalies.

IMO an interface must be designed to HELP and not present challenges or surprises. The surprise of iced sensors is enough. To degrade the plane by the first surprise IMO is a way to create chances to confusion. And this is dangerous. Could force PF to "new ideas" that could present "new problems".

In Thiells 727 case a basic crew error triggered anomalies in the sensors and the confusion was due "redundant anomalies" in the interface (alt and climb indicators misleading crew).

In AF447 crew didn't trigger both anomalies, and were required to understand very fast reason of SEVERAL interface outputs, adding to the initial surprises.

Indeed, A/C operated as designed. (no permanent failures) Just a "glitch" (a temporary cold) generated enough outputs making 3 crew not able to decipher interface outputs.

It's not necessary to review or improve the interface? Or it's just enough to train on similar situations (after the more obsolete sensors were substituted)? And the current sensor with know limitations? May trigger again anomalies in the System? The Redundancy issue (lack of) was solved?

Last edited by RR_NDB; 15th Apr 2012 at 17:43. Reason: Text impvmt
RR_NDB is offline