Psychology

The aviation industry, primarily in the commercial sector, has a vast experience with regard to application of the state of the art technology which majors in human support systems, for instance the flight regulation instated in modern glass cockpits. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) initiated research at INEL to find out common errors by pilots which were rampant when the pilots were operating automated systems in space in advanced technology aircraft. The study researched the major causes and potential remedies to pilots inability to keep on the track delineated by on the ground air traffic controllers. In order to reach the objective of the research, NASA assessed deviation events with regard to altitude that were recorded by the Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS). ASRS was an initiative by NASA which maintained a database of all flight occurrences that had been recounted by pilots as well as air traffic controllers.  In response NASA came up with a model of the tasks that are expected of pilots so as to track and maintain the delineated altitudes assigned to them by the air traffic controllers on the ground. The reports that were acquired from the database of ASRS were used as a referral page to design the models.
    In the recent times the aviation industry together with the efforts of NASA and NTSB has stressed the importance of in-flight airline personnel coordination as well as intra-cockpit coordination together with the social grooming of professional relationships among crew members. Ideally the concept of cockpit resource management (CRM) stemmed from the need of strategic and organizational framework reformulation in the way the crew managed the aircraft while amidst flight. This implicated that their management of the flight was supposed to be the effort of a team as opposed to singularity in action (Foushee and Helmreich 1988). In glass cockpit, CRM refers to the practice of the flight crew, cabin crew and cockpit crew, which ideally encourages them to enhance each other.
    In a bid to tame accidents that were primarily attributed to controlled flight into terrain (CFI) that dipped the aviation industry mainly in the seventies, the FAA in the beginning of the eighties initiated a strategy dubbed FAR 121.542  to reverse this trend This strategy, FAR 121.542, postulated that all flight crew personnel were prohibited from undertaking any measures in the event of a critical phase of flight with the exception of only those practices that had been exemplified that would see the secure operation of the plane (Amalberti 1998). The portfolio of this critical phases practices of flight constituted of all operations on the ground including taxi, landing as well as takeoff together with all other flight practices and operations that were undertaken below ten thousand feet with the exception of cruise flight. The strategy further particularized that all flight crew personnel were restricted from any practice during an aircrafts critical phase that could result in the distraction of another member of the crew ultimately resulting in the improper conduct of the aircraft. As such this communication that delineated the interaction of the crew members assigned each crew member with expected duties thus eliminating the element of confusion as well as clash of duties as each crew was aware of hisher expectation and thus engaged in practices that were all beneficial to the flight and not to its detriment. The cabin crew only passed information that was judged as critical to the pilot in the cockpit avoiding unnecessary panic.
    The initiation of state of the art auto pilot, flight control as well as flight monitoring systems in todays aircraft such as the one in the air bus series, the Boeing together with the McDonnell Douglas has led to immense changes in the operation of the said aircraft. The pilots together with the co-pilots as well as other technical attendants in air have reversed their role from in-the loop pilots to managers of an advanced system. The state of the art technology has implicated that more of the duties formerly assigned to human labour has been taken up by technology thus resulting into airlines reducing the crew to two from three. The role of the flight engineer has been assumed by the computerised system that manages the flight through out its tenure in the air. The workload that was assigned to the numerous in-flight attendants has significantly diminished for some but for others there has been an increase in expected roles with their work schedules seeing additional tasks added. A case in mind is the FMS reprogramming that may be called up by air traffic control that expects the pilot to implement several modifications to the flights initial plans.
    The current level of safety in aircraft can also be attributed to glass cockpit aviation. Safety indexes are proof of the fact that glass cockpits in comparison to previous generation of aircraft have accident ratings that are approximately half the rate recorded for the traditional aircraft. The safety ratings recorded as a result of the invention of glass cockpit aviation can be compared to the safety standards that are exhibited in the railway system as well as the nuclear industry. One though has to put in mind the contribution of other variables in conjunction with glass cockpit aviation which include air traffic control together with airports as well as the employment of simulators in training.
      One advantage that glass cockpit aviation has significantly gained the aviation industry is within the field of Electronic Flight Instrument Systems. Ideally aircrafts became most sought after means of transportation when both accurate as well as secure instruments of flight eliminated the option of the pilot having to constantly maintain visual correspondence with the ground to gain information with regard to the various needs that arose. Electronic Flight Instrument Systems are absolutely critical to the pilot especially when heshe is expected to carry out flight operations and practices that are deemed safe. It is important for the said pilot to have primary working knowledge of the instruments. Glass cockpit aircraft has an array of instruments that aid the pilot in operating the aircraft. These include the altimeter as well as the magnetic air speed indicator together with the air speed indicator (ASI). These instruments are a requirement as delineated in the visual fight rules (VFR). Instrument flight rules (IFR), in addition to the above instruments also expects that all in-flight aircraft also consist of other instruments that primarily include, a gyroscopic rate-of-turn indicator as well as a device that the aircrafts flight crew use for taking barometric pressure indexes generally referred to as the sensitive altimeter adjustable. In addition to the above instruments glass cockpit aircrafts also have slip-skid indicator as well as a flight-clock that displays seconds, minutes as well as hours. This clock has a sweep digital pointer which primarily displays digital information. Moreover the aircraft also has a gyroscopic pitch-and-bank indicator which the flight crew uses for ascertaining a digital horizon together with a gyroscopic direction indicator. The Electronic Flight Instrument Systems exhibit unsurpassed flexibility which enhances coordination of the flight crew members with its system that is adequately located to enable flow of information among the crew members. The glass cockpits en route ADI as well as terminal modes of display come with the advantage of alleviating unwarranted pieces of information. The glass cockpits air speed and trend displays feed the pilot with the necessary information that allow him to integrate multifunction of the plane with the resultant advantage of balancing within the operations. Glass cockpits Electronic Flight Instrument System makes use of the architecture integrated within the system making the aircraft capable of performing extensive reversions in its operation in critical times. Moreover, during critical moments the glass cockpits extensive capability to perform diagnostic tests with its integrated technology elevates it favourably in comparison to the traditional aircraft as it diminishes the pilots need for equipment to perform line tests. This saves the pilot and the crew on time which might be critical in times of crises. The systems full-sky ADI as well as its 3D runway which is capable of accessing satellite views of the outside world provide the crew with more realistic images upon which they can make sound decisions. The electronic flight instrument systems work together with the attitude director indicator as well as the multifunction display to derive an articulated flight deck display. The attitude director indicator is capable of providing satellite images of the earth as well as the sky that ideally add up to fifty percent more to the pilots comprehension of the intended terminal. In addition to this the en route formats realized from this instrument are also larger than the ones realized from the standard 5 electromechanical instrument. The attitude director indicator blends several formats of display with the radar for the weather and the integrated NAV source selection to derive an easy to understand and follow systemization of all flight practices together with tasks that are ideally endeared to avoid detrimental weather.   
        Many changes that have been introduced to the aviation industry by automation have resulted into significant benefits. This benefits would not have seen the light of the day were it not for the technology that the automated systems derive. The complexity of the aircraft without the automated system is very difficult to operate, as such, the modern technology benefits complex processes such as nuclear power plant operation as well as and aircraft (Sheridan 1992). A vast array of the automated systems in glass cockpit aviation have been received favourably and found to be invaluable by the flight crew thus cancelling the argument from some quarters that argue out automation to be for its owns sake (Peterson 1984). Such advantages include the horizontal situation indicator used by pilots. This instrument is placed at the artificial horizon assuming the position of the standard directional gyro (DG). In conjunction with another instrument known as the course deviation indicator it derives display for the pilot and thus diminishes instruments under the scope of the pilots watch. The HIS instrument is also integrated with a glide slope needle which implicates that the ILS instrument that is primarily located on the ground to provide critical information during landing, can be flown by singularly referring to the six primary flight instruments. Among other merits of the HIS instrument include its freedom with regard to the mix-up of reverse sensing. 
Some invaluable changes have also resulted from automation of the aircraft primarily changes that regard safety as well as user satisfaction. Human error that is usually associated with operating complex machinery has been eliminated by the glass cockpits embracing of computerised systems to run its complex flight operations. These complex operations were in the traditional aircraft under the command of the flight engineer. In the traditional aircraft, as a result of the flight engineers human error, these planes were prone to aviation accidents. Such is not the case for the glass cockpit as there operation is the subject of state of the art computer systems with the capability to calculate solutions and derive logical answers to complex systems with utmost precision as well as speed. Successful implementation of these changes needs highly trained pilots.   
    Monitoring of operations in the glass cockpit has been at most efficient. In general flight personnel have performed well in their diverse working environments that constitute the cockpit crew as well as the cabin crew. These improvements in their performance with overall decrease in aviation accidents can be attributed to the state of the art technology that glass cockpit hires in its computerised system. In a sense, when an array of probabilities for failure is rallied against the rate of success that has been realised in the crew, both on the ground as well as in-flight which ideally encompasses every single second of this continuous process, the relatively diminished occurrences of human error is impressive.
    One benefit that the computerization of the glass cockpit has resulted into is the reduction of the mental workload of its crew members and other flight operators. This was brought about by the fact that the complexity of the operation of the flight implicated momentous mental distress for the flight engineer. This was especially true, putting in mind that the flight engineer was a human being who would be much distressed especially in times of complexity. The human mind has its limits when it is faced with problems to solve. In critical situations when for instance the plane is in distress, the flight engineer might be distressed thinking about the plight of his family in the event of something going wrong in the plane. As such his divided mental attention might be much to the detriment of the operation consequently resulting into a crisis. In contrast to such circumstances, glass cockpit offers sophisticated technology that is able to realize probable and sound solutions without the burden of mental interruption unlike humans, they are bereft of these feelings. As such glass cockpit reduces human error and at the same time gains the crew the advantage of safety.
    In general glass cockpit has had a significant impact on aviation industry. Though some of these impacts have been negative, the significant benefit to the crew with regard to duty that was assigned and expected of them has either diminished or the said duties have been assumed by machines, creating a more simplified working environment.