成功大學博碩士論文系統

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表

研究生：	黃建鳴 Wong, Kin-Meng
論文名稱：	機場跑道入侵人為風險因子之探討-以飛航駕駛員為例 Airport Runway Incursion: Human Risk Factors in Pilots
指導教授：	張有恆 Chang, Yu-Hern
學位類別：	碩士 Master
系所名稱：	管理學院 - 交通管理科學系 Department of Transportation and Communication Management Science
論文出版年：	2010
畢業學年度：	98
語文別：	英文
論文頁數：	93
中文關鍵詞：	跑道入侵、人為風險因子、飛航駕駛員、SHELLO 模式、模糊德菲法
外文關鍵詞：	Runway Incursion, Human Risk factors, Airline Pilots, SHELLO Model, Fuzzy Delphi method, Analytical Hierarchical Process
相關次數：	點閱：153 下載：11
分享至:	分享至facebook 分享至twitter

查詢本校圖書館目錄查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統勘誤回報

機場跑道入侵為全球性的飛安議題。近年來，國內外跑道入侵事件有增無減，
造成之死傷較以往更形增加，其中大多與人為因素有關。然而，過往跑道入侵預防的工作主要集中在系統之完善性，較忽略人為因素的問題。且跑道入侵事故之主要發生原因近七成與飛航駕駛員有關。因此，本研究主要探討飛航駕駛員於跑道入侵之人為風險因子，進而降低跑道入侵事故的發生。

本研究以SHELLO模式為基礎，將飛航駕駛員人為風險因子分為六個互動構
面，包括飛航駕駛員核心能力、飛航駕駛員與他人互動、飛航駕駛員與環境互動、飛航駕駛員與組織互動、飛航駕駛員與軟體互動及飛航駕駛員與硬體互動。再將各個構面結合相關文獻與跑道入侵之案例分析，發展出飛航駕駛員於跑道入侵之人為風險因子。

本研究以專家問卷方式，藉由專家的專業意見進行飛航駕駛員風險因子之篩
選。首先以模糊德菲法篩選出SHELLO模式各構面之飛航駕駛員人為風險因子;
再經由112位國際航空公司的飛航駕駛員針對各個風險因子進行重要度篩選。將飛航駕駛員篩選之結果藉由層級分析法進行各構面風險因子值的相對重要性排序，並評估各構面風險因子之改善可行性，建構一整合模式，提出改善優先順序之建議，以供相關主管機關於跑道入侵策略評估之參考。

根據SHELLO模式調查結果，飛航駕駛員核心能力構面在全體專家排序中排
名第一。其中專家們認為最重要的前五項飛航駕駛員於跑道入侵之風險因子分別為「飛航駕駛員之情境察覺及注意力」、「跑滑道標線/指示牌」、「飛航駕駛員之安全態度」、「飛航駕駛員與塔臺之溝通」及「飛航駕駛員之溝通能力」，分別落在飛航駕駛員核心能力構面、飛航駕駛員與其他人互動構面及飛航駕駛員與環境互動構面。

The risk of a general aviation runway incursion event could kill hundreds of people in a single accident. It is growing larger as a result of current, and forecast, increases of global air traffic volume. Runway incursions tend to be occurred due to human errors especially the pilots’ errors. Identifying pilots’ risk factors in runway incursions will effectively reduce the severe threat of fatalities and losses caused by runway incursion accidents and incidents. The purpose of this study is to examine significant airline pilots’ human risk factors in runway incursions. We develop experts’ questionnaire and apply a human factors model to categorize the risk factors that we derived from the literature and the opinions of 112 airlines pilots. An empirical study of Taiwan’s airlines and civil aviation authority was conducted to determine these risk factors and integrates experts’ opinions about the relative importance and improvement-achievability of four risk management strategies for airline pilots to reduce runway incursion. Fuzzy Delphi method and Analytical Hierarchical Process
(AHP) were used to help experts weigh the 37 preliminary and 25 primary pilot’s risk factors. The top ten most significant pilots’ risk factors in runway incursion were
found in the dimensions of liveware, liveware to liveware, environment, and hardware. Integration of influential pilots’ risk factors ranking with the effective risk
management strategies may help the management and the aviation authority understand major operational and managerial weaknesses in the decision process of mitigating the runway incursions.

Table of Contents
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................ i
List of Tables ................................................................................................................ iv
List of Figures ............................................................................................................... vi
Chapter 1 ........................................................................................................................ 1
Introduction .................................................................................................................... 1
1 Research Background ........................................................................................... 1
2 Research Motivation ............................................................................................ 3
3 Research Purpose ................................................................................................. 3
4 Research Framework ............................................................................................ 3
Chapter 2 ........................................................................................................................ 5
Literature Review........................................................................................................... 5
1 Runway Incursion Background and Definitions .................................................. 5
1.1 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)…………………………………… 5
2.2 Canada………………………………………………………………………5
2.3 Australia……………………………………………………………………. 6
2.4 International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)………………………… 6
3 Contributing Factors to Runway Incursion .......................................................... 6
4 Aviation Human Factor Background and Definitions.......................................... 9
4.1 Definitions of Human factor……………………………………………….. 9
5 Classification Framework .................................................................................. 10
5.1 IATA Accident Classification Framework……………………………….. 10
5.2 Boeing Accident Prevention Strategies……………………………………15
5.3 Human Factor Analysis and Classification System (HFACS)…………… 16
Chapter 3 ...................................................................................................................... 18
Runway Incursion Case Studies................................................................................... 18
1 Case Studies in Taiwan: ..................................................................................... 18
2 International Case Studies .................................................................................. 23
3 Case studies conclusion ...................................................................................... 26
Chapter 4 ...................................................................................................................... 28
Model Construction ..................................................................................................... 28
1 Model…………………… ................................................................................. 28
1.1 The Human Factors Model……………………………………………….. 28
1.2 SHELLO model…………………………………………………………... 28
2 Selection of preliminary pilots‘ risk factors in SHELLO dimension ................. 30
3 Methodology ...................................................................................................... 37
3.1 Fuzzy Delphi Method…………………………………………………….. 37
3.2 Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)……………………………………….. 38
3.3 Risk factor Improvement Achievability Analysis…………………………39
Chapter 5 ...................................................................................................................... 40
Empirical Analysis ....................................................................................................... 40
1 First stage expert questionnaire and distribution................................................ 40
2 Second stage questionnaire - Pilots survey ........................................................ 40
2.1 Anova analysis…………….……………………………………………....44
3 Third stage expert questionnaire distribution and AHP analysis results ............ 45
3.1 Test of Consistency………………………………………………………..45
3.2 SHELLO dimensions and Pilots Risk factors Relative Weighting………………………………………………………………… 45
3.3 Overall Ranking and Relative Weighting of dimensions and pilots’ risk factors in runway incursion………………………………………………. 52
3.4 Comparison of risk factors importance between airline pilots and aviation management level………………………………………………………...54
4 Risk Factors Improvement Achievability .......................................................... 55
4.1 Improvement Achievability Ranking Analysis…………………………… 55
5 Priority order to improve pilots’ human risk factor in runway incursion .......... 57
5.1 Integration of relative weighting and improvement-achievability…........... 57
Chapter 6 ...................................................................................................................... 62
Conclusions and Suggestions ....................................................................................... 62
1 Research Conclusions ........................................................................................ 62
1.1 Findings of relative important pilots’ risk factors in runway incursion………………………………………………………………….. 62
1.2 Findings of integration of important pilot’ risk factors’ and improvement-achievability in runway incursion………………………....63
2 Research Suggestions ......................................................................................... 63
3 Research Contributions ...................................................................................... 64
4 Future Research Directions ................................................................................ 64
References…………………………………………………………………………… 65
Appendixes…………………………………………………………………………... 69

                                    

References
1. Aarons, R.N., 1995. Making Communication Work 441. Business &Commercial Aviation, 76, 82(0191-4642).
2. Airline Pilots Association, 2007. Producing a Professional Airline Pilot: Candidate Screening, Hiring, Training and Mentoring. ALPA White Paper.
3. Airservices Australia, Runway Incursion Survey. Ashgate.
4. ASRS Runway Incursion Incidents, 2008. ASRS CALLBACK, No 342.
5. Australian Transport Safety Bureau, 2004. Runway Incursions: 1997 to 2003, Research Report.
6. Aviation Safety Council, 2002. Aircraft Accident Report ACS-AAR-02-04-002.
7. Aviation Safety Council, 2004. Aircraft Accident Report ASC-AIR-03-09-001.
8. Aviation Safety Council, 2007. Aircraft Accident Report ASC-AOR-07-08-002.
9. Aviation Safety Council, 2005, Flight GE028-ATR-72 Incident, Aircraft Accident Report.
10. Bureau Enquêtes-Accidents report, 2000. Accident on 25 May 2000 at Paris Charles de Gaulle (95) to aircraft F-GHED operated by Air Liberté and G-SSWN operated by Streamline Aviation.
11. Buckley, J. J., 1985. Fuzzy Hierarchical Analysis. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 17, p.233-247.
12. Boeing Co., 2006. Statistical Summary of Commercial Jet Airplane Accidents 1959-2005, Seattle, Washington.
13. Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, 1982-91. Accident Prevention Strategies, Airplane Safety Engineering.
14. Braithwaite, G.R., Caves, R.E., Faulkner, J.P.E., 1998. Australian aviation.
Safety- observations from the 'lucky' country. Journal of Air Transport Management 4 (1), 55-62.
15. Carleton, W., 2001. Countermeasures Against the Biggest Threat to Safety. Flight Safety Quarterly, Vol. 28, 52-53.
16. Chang,Y.H., Wang, Y.C., 2003. A Study on the Runway Incursions. Civil Aviation Journal Quarterly, Vol. 5, No. 4.
17. Chang,Y.H., Wang, Y.C., 2010. Significant human risk factors in aircraft maintenance technicians, Safety Science 48, 54-62.
18. Chidester, T., Helmreich, R., Gregorich, S., & Geis, C., 1991. Pilot personality and crew coordination: Implications for training and selection. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 1, 25-44.
19. Chidester, T., Kanki, B., Foushee, H., Dickinson, C. & Bowles, S., 1990. Personality factors in flight operations: Volume I. Leader characteristics and crew performance in a fullmission air transport simulation. (NASA Technical Memorandum-102259.) Moffett Field, CA: NASA Ames Research Center.
20. Christensen, G.E., 2001. Runway Incursions: The Ground View, Flying Safety.
21. Dominguez, C., Vidulich, M., Vogel, E. & McMillan, G., 1994. Situation awareness: Papers and annotated bibliography. Armstrong Laboratory, Human System Center, ref. AL/CF-TR-1994-0085.
22. Edwards, E., 1972. Man and machine: Systems for safety, Proceedings of British Airline Pilots Associations Technical Symposium. British Airline pilots Associations, London, 21–36.
23. European Action Plan for the Prevention of Runway Incursions, 2006.
24. FAA, 2000. Office of Runway Safety. National blueprint for runway safety Washington D.C.: FAA Office of Runway Safety.
25. FAA, 2000. Human Factors Principles & Practices System. Safety Handbook, Chapter 17.
26. FAA, 2005. Runway Safety Report.
27. FAA, 2007. Wrong Runway Departures. Aviation Safety Information Analysis and Sharing (ASIAS).
28. FAA, 2008. Runway Safety Report.
29. Final report, 2001. ACCIDENT INVOLVED AIRCRAFT BOEING MD-87, registration SE-DMA and CESSNA 525-A, registration D-IEVX Milano Linate airport.
30. Flottau, J., 2001. Runway Incursion Kills 118 at Milan-Linate, Flight Safety Quarterly, 51-52.
31. Forman, E.H., 1983. The Analytic Hierarchy Process as a Decision Support System, Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society.
32. Forman, E.H., 2001. The Analytic Hierarchy Process and Expert Choice. Decision By Objective, Chapter 4, 44-125.
33. G.K. Singh, C. Meier, 2004. Preventing runway incursions and conflicts. Aerospace Science and Technology 8, 653–670.
34. Graham R. B., 2001. Attitude or Latitude, Australian aviation safety: Ashgate.
35. Hawkins, F.H., 1993. Human factors in flight. 2nd Edition, Aldershot: Ashgate.
36. Hawkins, F.H., 1998. Human Factors In Flight (2nd ed.),19-36: USA.
37. Ho, H., Lee, H.C., Tsai, W.L. 2001. An Overview of Human Factors in Aviation Safety. Civil Aviation Journal Quarterly, Vol. 3, No.2.
38. Hughes, D., 2003. Tacking Runway Incursions. Flight Safety Quarterly, Vol. 36, 21-22.
39. Human Systems Information Analysis Center, 2004. Runway Incursion: Human Factors in Runway Incursions.
40. Hwang, C.L., Lin, M.L., 1987. Group Decision Making Under Multiple Criteria.
41. IATA, 2006. Safety Report. International Air Transport Association. Geneva, Switzerland/ Montreal, Canada.
42. ICAO Human Factors Digest No. 10., 1993. Human factors management and organization. ICAO. Montreal.
43. Ishikawa, A., Amagasa, M., 1993. The Max-Min Delphi Method and Fuzzy Delphi Method via Fuzzy Integration. Fuzzy Sets and System, Vol.5, 241-253.
44. Jensen, R.S., 1995. Pilot judgement and crew resource management. Brookfield, VT: Ashgate.
45. Joint Safety Implementation Team, 2002. Runway Incursion, Results and Analysis.
46. King, R., 2002. Runway Incursions Reducing the Risk. Flight Safety Quarterly Vol. 31, 48-52.
47. Khatwa, R., 2003. An Analysis of Runway Incursions, 1990-2002. Flight Safety Quaterly, Vol. 33, 12-13.
48. Koenig, R.L., 1995. FAA report surveys US airline pilots to recover factors that
promote runway incursions. Flight Safety Foundation, Airport Operations 21(4).
49. Koonce, J.M., 2002. Human Factors In The Training of Pilots, 5-11. Great Britain: Biddles.
50. Laarhoven, P. J. M., Pedrycz, W., 1983. A Fuzzy Extension of Saaty’s priority theory. Fuzzy Sets and System, No.11, p.229-241.
51. Lewis, C.P.E., CSP., 2004. Decision Making. Flight Safety. Flight Safety Foundation-Taiwan, 27-28.
52. Linstone, H. A., & Turoff, M., ed, 2002. The Delphi Method: Techniques and Applications, ISBN 0-201-04294-0.
53. McFadden, K.L., 1993. An empirical investigation of the relationship between alcohol- and drug-related motor vehicle convictions and pilot flying performance. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Texas at Arlington.
54. Mcfadden, K.L., Towell, E.R., 1999. Aviation Human factors: A framework for the new millennium. Journal of Air Transport Management 5, 177-184.
55. Merritt, A., Helmreich, R. L., 1998. Culture in the cockpit: A multi-airline study of pilot attitudes and values. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium on Aviation Psychology (Columbus, OH: Ohio State University).
56. Moses, L. N., & Savage, I., 1989. The effect of airline pilot characteristic on perceptions of job safety risks.
57. NASA Fact Sheet, Runway Incursion Prevention－Cockpit displays could help
reduce accidents, FS-2000-09-53-LaRC.
58. Picano, J., 1991. Personality types among experience military pilots. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine. 62(6). 517-520.
59. Pounds, J., 2004. Optimizing Human Performance to Reduce Runway Incursions. Federal Aviation Administration, Human Factors Research & Engineering Division.
60. Proctor, P., 2000. New Head-Up Tool Aims to Cut Runway Incidents. Aviation Week & Space Technology, New York.
61. Reason, J., 1990. Human Errors, New York: Cambridge University Press.
62. Saaty, T. L., 1980. The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw Hill International.
63. Shappell, S. A., Wiegmann, D.A., 2000. The Human Factors Analysis and Classification System – HFACS, DOT/FAA/AM-00/7.
64. Shappell, S. A., Wiegmann, D.A., 2004. HFACS Analysis of Military and Civilian Aviation Accidents: A North American Comparison. ISASI.
65. Shinar, Y., 1995. Personality as the key factor in the competence of a pilot. In R.S. Jensen (Ed.) Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium on Aviation Psychology (pp. 1137-1141). Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University.
66. Teng, J. Y.,Tzeng, G.H., 1993. Transportation Investment Project Selection with
Fuzzy Multi-Objective, Transportation Planning and Technology 17, 91-112.
67. Transport Canada (2000). National Civil Aviation Safety Committee Sub-Committee on runway incursions (Rep. No. TP13795E).
68. Warburton, S., 2001. Language Confusion At CDG Caused Collision, Claims BEA. Flight Safety, Vol. 28, 59.
WEBSITE REFERENCES
1. FAA Website, Runway Safety, http://www.faarsp.org/
2. http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19770327-0, Aviation Safety
Network, Flight Safety Foundation
3. http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19770327-1, Aviation Safety Network, Flight Safety Foundation
4. http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20000725-0, Aviation Safety Network, Flight Safety Foundation
5. http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/aero_08/human_textonly.html
6. Runway Incursion: Where Are We?., http://www.AirlineSafety .com

校內：2015-07-23公開
校外：2015-07-23公開

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

相關論文