av_fatigue_book_052411_low_res.pdf

8/14/2019 av_fatigue_book_052411_low_res.pdf

1/28

June 2011

Aviation Fatigue Research Roadmap:

A Framework for Partnership


2/28

About MITRE:

The MITRE Corporation is a not-for-profit organization chartered to work in the public interest. As a national resource, we apply our expertise

in systems engineering, information technology, operational concepts, and enterprise modernization to address our sponsors' critical needs

www.mitre.org


3/28

Dreamstime

Foreword............................................................................................................................................................... 1

Introduction.......................................................................................................................................................... 3

Research Initiatives: Then and Now................................................................................................................ 6

Research Roadmap: Structure and Relationships.........................................................................................8

Scheduled Operations Working Group.........................................................................................................10

On-Demand Operations Working Group......................................................................................................12

Shift Work Working Group................................................................................................................................ 14

Tools Working Group..........................................................................................................................................16

Modeling Working Group................................................................................................................................ 17

The Way Forward................................................................................................................................................18

Acronyms............................................................................................................................................................20

Appendix............................................................................................................................................................. 21

Contents


4/28

iStockphoto


5/28

1

Foreword

MITRE, in collaboration with government agencies and the aviation community, is working to develop a comprehensive research

roadmap to address the risks of human fatigue in aviation. This roadmap addresses the management and mitigation of aviation

workforce fatigue in civilian and military missions, across a diverse set of operational functions. In 2009, MITRE launched a

corporate special initiative to develop a comprehensive research roadmap, recognizing the need for collaboration and synergy across

the government agencies it serves.

In April 2010, MITRE organized a summit with the nations leaders from academia, government agencies, and research institutions to

deliberate the initial framework for partnership and collaborative mechanisms for developing this roadmap. This summit was the

catalyst for the Aviation Fatigue Research Roadmap: A Framework for Partnership described herein.

The roadmap initiative is a multi-agency, industry-wide effort. It focuses on applying research to operational needs in a coordinated

and collaborative manner. This document summarizes the organizational and collaboration mechanisms that have been established

and the progress made thus far. It also outlines the strategies, priorities, and milestones for future phases in the development of acomprehensive Aviation Fatigue Research Roadmap.


6/28

Thomas Berry / MITREThomas Berry / MITRE


7/28

Introduction

3

Tackling transportation-related fatigue requires collaboration

among the many individuals and groups involved with this

issue. Recognizing the benefits of broad collaboration, MITRE

launched a special initiative in 2009 to develop a comprehensive

roadmap to address aviation fatigue, with a focus on bridging

research efforts and operational needs. In April 2010, MITRE

organized a summit of 40 of the nations aviation leaders,

operational managers, policy makers, researchers, and safety

experts from government and industry to discuss the safety

risks of human fatigue in aviation and the risk mitigation

strategies for combating it. The summit resulted in a call to

action for the development of a comprehensive aviation fatigue

research roadmap and a framework for partnership, specifically:

Develop a collaborative framework

Form working groups to begin initial collaboration efforts

Organize a symposium within a year, bringing together the

broader aviation fatigue stakeholder community.

This document addresses these commitments, reporting on

the current progress and outlining a strategy for the way

forward.

Fatigue has played a subtle and sometimes direct role in

aviation safety and has been well documented as a contributor

to a number of accidents and incidents. A timeline of examples

characteristic of fatigue-related accidents and incidents is

presented in the Appendix. Aircraft mechanics, air traffic

controllers, civilian and military flight crews, and others are

particularly susceptible to fatigue due to the nature of their

professions. In the aviation domain, 24-hour operations are a

necessity, and irregular, unpredictable work schedules are

integral to operating the business. Moreover, schedules that

have historically been viewed as regular or normal need to be

reassessed in the context of ever-changing business andoperational needs. Addressing the adverse impacts of fatigue

resulting from the operational and business environments has

never been more critical, given the rapid growth and complexity

in the aviation industry that has emerged over the past decade.

Much research has been conducted over the past three decades

to understand and mitigate human fatigue in aviation. This

research has been invaluable to advancing the science of

fatigue, improving awareness of the adverse impacts of fatigue,

and developing mitigation strategies for combating the issue.

Various operational segments of the civilian and military

aviation communities have developed policies and strategies

based on this foundational research. However, rapid changes in

civilian aviation industry and military mission requirements,

technology advancements revolutionizing the industry, and

new business and operational models redefining the role of the

human in the enterprise, are establishing a renewed interest in

applying fatigue research more effectively to address the issues

resulting from these emerging dynamics.

Therefore, it is timely to leverage the broad stakeholder

communitys energy, know-how, and resources in a collaborative

and transparent manner to address human fatigue in these

changing environments. For the new process to be effective it

needs to be sustainable over time, with strong sponsorship by,

and support from, the operational community. To support the

spirit of collaboration, the Aviation Fatigue Research Roadmap

initiative is now underway to bring together the diverse

domestic and international stakeholder communities (e.g.,

operations, academia, industry, regulators) to address these

emerging issues.

This document outlines an Aviation Fatigue Research Roadmap

partnership framework that will:

Formalize a collaboration process for aviation fatigue

research and mitigations

Identify current work and cooperative efforts that can be

leveraged as part of thisinitiative

Develop collaboration mechanisms, such as a Web portal,

to facilitate and enhance cooperation and teamwork among initiative participants.

During the April 2010 summit, participants reaffirmed that

fatigue is an issue that transcends diverse workforces in the

civilian and military aviation domains, including flight crews,

cabin crews, air traffic controllers, dispatchers, maintenance


8/28

personnel, helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS),

unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) pilots, and others. Some key

issues discussed were:

Current research efforts and activities

Perspectives from different missions: military, civiliancommercial, and business aviation

Existing and emerging gaps in fatigue research

Fatigue risk management systems (FRMSs)

Fatigue countermeasures.

Initial participants in this multi-agency initiative to develop the

Aviation Fatigue Research Roadmap include:

Air National Guard Readiness Center

Department of Defense (DoD)

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)

FAA Civil Aerospace Medical Institute (CAMI)

National Aeronautics and Space Administrations (NASA)

Aviation Safety program

Naval Safety Center

U.S. Air Force

U.S. Army Aeromedical Research Laboratory

U.S. Army Air Mobility Command Flight Safety program

U.S. Coast Guard.

Additional stakeholders, including several airlines, commercial

airline industry groups, general aviation safety groups,

universities, and labor organizations are also participating in

this collaborative effort.

The April 2010 summit marked the launch of an initial phase of

this multi-agency, industry-wide initiative. The aviation leaders

who participated in the summit, in addition to those who

subsequently joined the effort, are now developing this

integrated, evolving roadmap for aviation fatigue research. The

first step in the development of this roadmap is a framework

for partnership, which was unveiled at the Aviation Fatigue:Building a Bridge between Research and Operational Needs

symposium in June 2011. Additional details and activities of

the roadmap initiative are evolving and will be defined in future

roadmap phases.

iStockphoto


9/28

Greg Nelson / MITRE

5


10/28

2340

2335

2330

2325

2320

2315

2310

2305

2300

2255

2250

2245

2240

2235

2230

2225

2220

A1681

L2053860

854

633A3860

766002

119E227

E459

E387

661

483E285

E170S216

3884

6275E85

E107

A2342

84

E489

A1954

E495555

4606505

E241

62325

A1109

A539

E12

E424

THD 4

U.S. Military Effortsto Address Fatigue

The U.S. military has conducted

research on fatigue in aviation and

air traffic operations since the early

1980s. Brief summaries of their

efforts over the past 30 years (by

service branch) are listed below:

U.S. Air Force

Conducted research on the effects

of extended periods of wakefulness

on performance, mood, and

physiological markers.

Studied the effects of sleep loss on

team performance.

Developed shift work scheduling

guides.

Studied the effect of the air traffic

control (ATC) 2-2-1 schedule on

fatigue and performance.

Assessed the effects of fatigue risk

factors in shift workers, including

crew members and maintenance personnel for unmanned and

manned aircraft.

Currently identifying biomarkers for

fatigue resistance and susceptibility

U.S. Army

Assessed exercise as a potential

fatigue countermeasure for aviators

Assessed how prolonged wakeful-

ness affects decision-making.

Investigated tools for monitoring

performance degradation associ-

ated with sleep loss and sustained

operations.

Developed an individualized model

to predict performance change

initiated by sleep loss.

Developed a model to assess

cognitive and physical performance

effects caused by sustained

operations.

Surveyed aviator and aircrew

members perceptions of the effects

of fatigue on operations; collected

information regarding sleep

quantity/quality, along with work and

flight hours.

U.S. Navy

Assessed the effects of sustained

operations on cognitive performance

and fatigue, and evaluated the ability

of dextro-methamphetamine to

mitigate these effects in a group of

Marines.

Surveyed the effects of fatigue on

continuous operations and solicited

information regarding countermea-

sures employed by aircrews.

Assessed the potential use of

armodafinil to preserve vigilance in

air traffic controllers.

Extensive and foundational research in fatigue is (and has been) ongoing over the past

several decades. While much of that research has been clinical in nature, it has formed a

solid scientific foundation for many agencies and operators to develop policies, procedures,and best practices addressing the adverse impacts of fatigue. However, a vast amount of

that research remains untapped and fertile for further mining and application to evolving

operational needs. This research has the potential to inform the development of new

regulations and mitigations surrounding issues such as flight time limitations and rest

requirements. Equally important, this research can help develop best industry practices

and standards for managing the risks of fatigue in the changing operational environment.

While hundreds of research projects and efforts around the world are studying many aspects

of fatigue, they are not always connected or leveraged in ways that can generate synergy

and expedite applications in operations. More importantly, researchers and sponsors are

facing the challenge of staying abreast of ongoing efforts in a timely manner. It is thischallenge that the Aviation Fatigue Research Roadmap initiative is designed to address on

a larger, worldwide scale.

There have been many cooperative efforts among government, research, and operational

communities in the recent past. With respect to commercial flight crew operations, for

example, research on ultra-long range (ULR) commercial flights involved a partnership

between the FAA and an airline to develop mitigation procedures for flights longer than

16 hours that required four pilots.

This early research led to more recent efforts to amend an Operations Specification via a

joint project, the Scientific Steering Committee (SSC) Study. Three U.S. commercial airlinessupported by teams of fatigue specialists are collaborating in the collection and analysis of

fatigue data obtained from samples of pilots at their respective airlines. While the data

collection protocol and equipment are similar across these three airlines, there are differences

in the data being collected, due to variations in each air carriers flight schedules (e.g., length

of flights, number of time zones crossed). Each of the three participating airlines has

completed data collection from its pilots; one of the airlines is also planning a follow-on

study involving flight attendants by using similar data collection and analysis techniques.

Collecting operational data, as in this example, presents opportunities to amend the existing

science, gain new insights, and inform policies in more effective ways. It also presents challenges

in the management and harmonization of disparate fatigue data sets and the protection and

stewardship of sensitive data in ways that can effectively help the broader aviation community.

As another example, the FAA is currently conducting work in the aviation maintenance

fatigue segment. The FAAs maintenance fatigue research initiative has developed fatigue

data collection instruments; it also is developing software applications for analysis of the

data. The FAA is working with airlines and labor groups to apply data collection tools as part

of event investigations and/or as an a priori measure of fatigue.

These examples highlight some of the joint efforts currently underway. More examples of

ongoing research and collaborations on fatigue are listed in the adjacent table.

Research Initiatives: Then and Now


11/28

7

Initiative/Project

The Fatigue and RiskManagement Forum

Fatiguing Effects of Multi-SegmentFlight Schedules

UAL90

Scientific Steering Commitee(SSC)

easyJet FRMS development withsupporting System IntegratedRisk Assessment (SIRA)

FRMS Implementation Guide

Evaluated sleep and restguidance for a ULR flightoperation

U.S. Department of Transportation(DoT) Multi-Modal FatigueRoadmap

Committee on the Effects ofCommuting on Pilot Fatigue

The Effects of Commuting onCrewmember Fatigue

Description

Air New Zealand, easyJet, DeltaAir Lines, Virgin, and QintiQ havecome together to discuss FRMSissues and jointly develop best

practices for the industry that willbe made available online for useby all. Members plan to meetonce a year to hear from industry,science, regulators, and employersregarding their experience.

Study of fatigue in multi-segmentoperations.

Validation of the Fatigue Avoidanceand Safety Tool (FASTTM) witha commercial airline.

Researching the relative effectsof fatigue in ultra-long haul versuslong-haul operations at three U.S.

commercial airlines.

Developed a FRMS including afatigue countermeasure trainingprogram for easyJet.

The International Air TransportAssociation (IATA) and InternationalCivil Aviation Organization (ICAO)are developing a FRMSImplementation Guide to becompleted in late 2011.

Assessed effects of ULR flightoperations to the U.S. on fatigueand developed and validateda model.

Developing a framework in supportof a multi-modal fatigue roadmapwhich lists programs, outcomes,effective impacts, and gaps. Effortis identifying needs, programs,and results. Emphasis is on needsassessment, problem definition,personal countermeasures, corporatecountermeasures, and supportingtechnologies and their implementation.

Examined the information regardingprevalence and effects of commutingon pilot fatigue. Identified next stepsand recommended regulatorychanges and areas of potential

research for the FAA.

Assessing how commuting affectscrew fatigue.

Sponsor(s)

N/A

Regional Airline Association(RAA)

Fatigue Sciences;Air Line Pilots Association(ALPA)

Three U.S. commercial airlines

easyJet;Clockwork Research

Fatigue Risk ManagementSystems Task Force at IATAand ICAO

Qatar Airways

U.S. DoT;National Safety CouncilAction Committee

National Academy of Sciences

Crew Safety and SecurityResearch Team (CSSRT) atWestern Michigan University

Point of Contact

Curt Graeber, Ph.D.(Non-Executive Chair)

Hans Van Dongen, Ph.D.

John Caldwell, Ph.D.

Gregory Belenky, Ph.D.Philippa Gander, Ph.D.Martin Moore-Ede, M.D., Ph.D.

Alexandra Holmes, Ph.D.

Curt Graeber, Ph.D.(Task Force Leader)

Alexandra Holmes, Ph.D.

Carlos Comperatore, Ph.D.Stephen Popkin, Ph.D.

Toby Warden, Ph.D.

Lori Brown

Examples of Worldwide Fatigue Mitigation Efforts and Research Collaborations

Graham K. Glover / MITREGraham K. Glover / MITRE


12/28

Fatigue research can be broadly defined by three operational

domains: scheduled operations, on-demand operations, and

shift work.

Scheduled aviation operations typically refer to flights flown

by airline pilots working for international (e.g., Japan

Airlines, Lufthansa), national (e.g., United Airlines, Delta Air

Lines), or regional (e.g., Atlantic Southeast Airlines, Republic

Airlines) air carriers.

On-demand aviation operations are those operations that

are not scheduled. They include emergency medical services

(EMS) and other medical transport flights, firefighting

flights, search-and-rescue flights, charter flights, and

wartime flight operations. These flights are on-demand for a

reason; the need for them was not anticipated in advance or

the nature of the mission required last-minute planning

and execution.

Aviation shift work can take many forms and round-the-

clock operations are the norm for this segment of the

business. Most mechanics, dispatchers, ramp workers, and

air traffic controllers work on rotating, eight-hour shifts.

Each operational category includes environments, schedules,

and stressors that contribute to fatigue. To address the unique

characteristics and challenges of these domains, a working

group for each has been established as an initial step in this

roadmap. Additionally, tools and modeling working groups have

also been organized to focus on the methods of measurement

and the development of mathematical-behavioral models that

are appropriate to each of the three operational categories.

Consequently, the initiative includes five working groups, eachrepresented in the working group structure graphic below.

Each working group will comprise members from participating

communities: operational (flight and non-flight), research, and

Research Roadmap: Structure and Relationships

Participating Communities

Working Group Structure

Operational

FlightPilots Ultra-Long Range Multi-Segment Military Firefighting Search & Rescue Emergency Medical ServicesCabin Crew

Non-FlightMechanicsDispatchersControllersTechnical Operations

Industry

AirlinesFatigue Risk Management

System VendorsTradeLaborRegulatory

Research

ResearchersAcademicGovernmentCommericalMilitary

MethodologyOperational Domains

ScheduledOperations On-DemandOperations Shift Work ModelingTools


13/28

9

industry. It is anticipated that not all communities will

participatein every working group and that some working

groups, based on their needs, might contain more members

from one community than another.

Another level of organization initiated within this roadmap is

the Aviation Fatigue Research Roadmap Technical Advisory

Panel (TAP). The TAP currently comprises three members from

each working group. Each of the three members represents a

different supporting community, such that a maximum

amount of diversity exists among the backgrounds of TAP

members. Ultimately, it is expected that a steering committee

will oversee progress on the initiative. That committee will

communicate with the TAP to move the roadmap process

forward. The following table summarizes the current TAP

participants.

ScheduledOperations

Tom Nesthus, Ph.D.

Engineering ResearchPsychologist

FAA/CAMI

Captain Jim MangiePilot Fatigue Program

Director

Line Check Airman

Delta Air Lines

Melissa Mallis, Ph.D.Chief Scientist,

Operational and

Fatigue Research

Institutes for

Behavior Resources,

Inc.

On-DemandOperations

Gregory Belenky, M.D.

Research Professor andDirector, Sleep and

Performance Research

Center

Washington State

University

Eric Lugger, M.S.Director of Safety

Landmark Aviation

Carlos Comperatore,Ph.D.Human Systems

Integration, USCG

HQs Human Element

and Ship Design

Division

U.S. Coast Guard

Shift Work

William Johnson, Ph.D.

Chief Scientific andTechnical Advisor for

Human Factors in

Aircraft Maintenance

Systems

FAA

Ann Lindeis, Ph.D.Manager, Safety

Management Planning

and Analysis,

Operational SupportNAV CANADA

John GogliaFormer Member

National Transportation

Safety Board (NTSB)

Tools

Hans Van Dongen,

Ph.D.Research Professor

Sleep and Performance

Research Center

Washington State

University

Steven Predmore,Ph.D.Vice President and

Chief Safety Officer

JetBlue Airways

Emma Romig, M.S.Principal Investigator

Boeing Commercial

Airplanes

Modeling

Stephen Popkin,

Ph.D.Director, Human Factors

Research and System

Applications Center

of Innovation

John A. Volpe National

Transportation Systems

Center

David Neri, Ph.D.Deputy Director,

Warfighter Performance

Science & Technology

DepartmentDirector, Warfighter

Protection & Applications

Division

Office of Naval Research

Gregory WhitingChairman, United Airlines

ALPA MEC Fatigue

Committee

Air Line Pilots

Association, International,

United Airlines

TAP Leadership (June 2011)

iStockphoto


14/28

The scheduled operations working group is led by Tom

Nesthus, Ph.D., Engineering Research Psychologist, FAA/CAMI;Captain Jim Mangie, Pilot Fatigue Program Director and Line

Check Airman, Delta Air Lines; and Melissa Mallis, Ph.D., Chief

Scientist, Operational and Fatigue Research, Institutes for

Behavior Resources, Inc. They will focus on research pertaining

to scheduled domestic and international, long-haul and multi-

segment operations. There is considerable overlap between the

causes of fatigue and methods for mitigating fatigue in

long-haul and short-haul/multi-segment operations. Fatigue in

scheduled operations tends to be associated with night flights,

jet lag, early wakeups, time pressure, multiple flight legs, and

consecutive duty periods without sufficient rest for recovery.1

The focus of this working group will be on fatigue mitigation

through scheduling; monitoring and measurement in operational

environments; compensation for circadian desynchronization;

and enhanced modeling that evaluates schedule, circadian

rhythm, time zone, time of day, number of operations, the

physical environment, individual differences, cognitive effects

of task characteristics, high task load, and the effect of

situational or environmental stressors.

While not an exhaustive list, some of the emerging gaps inscheduled operations fatigue research identified by the working

group include:

How does multi-segment flying

affect crew performance per

segment?

How should bio-mathematical

fatigue prediction models be

validated?

What are the desynchronization effects and performance

decrements on multi-day pairings with flights crossing

multiple time zones?

What are the desynchronization effects and performance

decrements on multi-day pairings that initially cross multiple

time zones then remain within two to three time zones?

What are the effects of extended block times on crew

performance?

What are the effects of light on crew performance?

What are the effects of consecutive nights of flying on crewperformance levels?

Scheduled Operations Working Group

iStockphot

ScheduledOperations

1 Caldwell, J. A., M.M. Mallis, J.L. Caldwell, M.A. Paul, J.C. Miller, and D.F. Neri, 2009,Fatigue Countermeasures in Aviation. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 80, 2959.


15/28

1

iStockphoto


16/28

The on-demand operations working group is led by Gregory

Belenky, M.D., Research Professor and Director, Sleep andPerformance Research Center, Washington State University;

Eric Lugger, M.S., Director of Safety, Landmark Aviation; and

Carlos Comperatore, Ph.D., Human Systems Integration, USCG

HQs Human Element and Ship Design Division, U.S. Coast

Guard. They will focus on operations that occur in the civilian

and military environments, including EMS and other medical

transport flights, firefighting flights, search-and-rescue flights,

charter flights, and wartime flight operations. These operations

can include rotor-wing and fixed-wing aircraft; they are, by

nature, unpredictable, generally planned, and occur on short

notice.

The working group will focus on exogenous environmental

and task factors, including weather, time of day, and decision-

making associated with fatigue and go/no-go decisions in

high-risk, high-consequence environments. They will integrate

best practices from the shift work and scheduled operations

domains to develop fatigue

mitigation strategies for theon-demand environment.

A representative list of emerging

gaps in on-demand operations

fatigue research identified by the

working group includes:

How will crews incorporate the use of fatigue risk

assessment matrices, including duty and rest time as

potential risks, and use science-based research rather than

anecdotal assumptions in their pre-flight routines?

How can the industry begin to incorporate safety risk

reviews into their strategic business decision-making?

How should regulatory requirements be revised to

address fatigue as a risk factor?

On-DemandOperations

On-Demand Operations Working Group

iStockphot


17/28

13

U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Jamie Nicley


18/28

The shift work working group is led by William Johnson, Ph.D.,

Chief Scientific and Technical Advisor for Human Factors in

Aircraft Maintenance Systems, FAA; Ann Lindeis, Ph.D.,

Manager, Safety Management Planning and Analysis, Operational

Support NAV CANADA; and John Goglia, former Member,

National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). They will focus on

fatigue related to traditional shift work environments. Shift

work is common to both commercial and military domains.

Common aviation shift work includes aircraft maintenance, air

traffic control, dispatch/planning, and technical operations. In

addition to research in aviation domains, shift work has beenresearched extensively in non-aviation domains such as

medicine (e.g., medical resident training, surgery, and nursing),

industrial (e.g., power plants, industrial process controls), and

surface transportation (e.g., rail, trucking).

The shift work working group will focus on the nature of the

work shift, measurement and modeling in domains that are

not flight operations-oriented, and development of

mitigation strategies that do not require attention to

circadian desynchronosis.

While not a comprehensive list, some of the emerging gaps

in shift work fatigue research identified by the working

group include:

How can workers, management, and regulators begin to

understand and be aware of the effects of fatigue to

take personal and/or organizational action?

How can documentation be

improved to show that

fatigue presents a safety

and financial risk to

aviation maintenance?

How can science-based

scheduling tools be made

understandable and useful to the majority of industry

personnel?

How can current scheduling tools be revised to be more

comprehensive and incorporate personnel trades for

appointments, holidays, medical leave, personal leave,

overtime, etc.?

How can the transition from scientific knowledge to

field-ready applications be accelerated?

What type of education is needed such that top

management will back organizational changes in

support of fatigue mitigation?

How should job or task designs be improved to limit

the number of fatigue-related errors?

How can a safety culture and its critical role in effective

FRMSs be thoroughly examined?

Shift Work Working Group

Shift Work

iStockphoto


19/28

iStockpho

1

iStockphotoiStockphotoiStockphoto


20/28

The tools working group is led by Hans Van Dongen, Ph.D.,

Research Professor, Sleep and Performance Research Center,

Washington State University; Steven Predmore, Ph.D., Vice

President and Chief Safety Officer, JetBlue Airways; and Emma

Romig, M.S., Principal Investigator, Boeing Commercial

Airplanes. They will have members representing all three

operations areas. While research is extensive in the scheduled

operations and shift work environments, there are

inconsistencies in the measures used; this is likely due to the

lack of standard tools for measuring fatigue. The tools working

group will develop guidance for the use of objective and

subjective measures of fatigue in support of fatigue modeling

and fatigue risk mitigation.

Emphasis will be placed on the development of a common

toolset that considers the sensitivity, diagnosticity, intrusiveness,

reliability, and accuracy of various measures; how measures

can be combined; and how more intrusive and sensitive

measures often used in lab settings can be integrated or

correlated with less intrusive measures appropriate in

operational settings. The relative usefulness of various

measures in supporting advanced fatigue risk modeling

techniques will be considered.

Fatigue estimation and prediction tools are central components

of any FRMS. The primary purpose of such tools is the

prediction of performance

degradation due to fatigue in

advance of duty. Such predictions

provide operators the opportunity

to revise rosters or implement

mitigating actions to decrease the

overall operational risk due to

human fatigue. Additionally, some

tools perform real-time assessments of fatigue or fatigue-

induced risk. These estimates are based on pre-duty factors

supplemented by current duty time and type of operation, as

well as by sensor inputs indicating current physiological

status.

While not a complete list, several areas of research and

development of fatigue tools have been identified by the

working group as emerging gaps for further study, including:

What is required for a personal, individualized tool for

fatigue risk management to be developed?

What kinds of technologies can be developed or used for

measuring fatigue?

How will an industrial fatigue-avoiding roster optimization

tool be developed?

Tools Working Group

Tools

Norma J. Taber / MITRE


21/28

17

The modeling working group is led by Stephen Popkin, Ph.D.,

Director, Human Factors Research and System Applications

Center of Innovation, John A. Volpe National Transportation

Systems Center; David Neri, Ph.D., Deputy Director, Warfighter

Performance Science & Technology Department and Director,

Warfighter Protection & Applications Division, Office of Naval

Research; and Gregory Whiting, Chairman, United Airlines ALPA

Master Executive Council (MEC) Fatigue Committee. They will

have members that represent all three operations areas. The

prevalence of fatigue as a factor in recent incidents and

accidents in aviation has highlighted the need to develop FRMSs.

Core components of an FRMS are methods for assessing risk,

education and training, monitoring, and mitigating human

fatigue risk. Integral to any such system is a human fatigue and

performance model that is useful for predictive risk assessment

and personnel scheduling. Input to such a model includes

physiological characteristics and specific information about

workload and recuperation.

A fatigue model takes pre-duty factors such as the amount and

quality of pre-duty rest, the amount and type of pre-duty activity,

physiological characteristics of the performer, pharmacological

interventions, environmental factors, and the type and amount

of duty to be performed as input. These factors are combined to

create an assessment of the risk of degraded performance.

Most fatigue models produce quantitative estimates of fatigue

or alertness. The connection to concepts such as job performance

degradation or fatigue risk remains to be explored fully to best

exploit the fatigue models for safety. Existing fatigue models are

concerned with a logical or mathematical

representation of one or more of the following.2

Objective measures of neurobehavioral performance

Subjective assessments of

fatigue

Fatigue-related task errors

Fatigue-related risk of

operational accidents

Estimated sleep/wake times

In aviation, fatigue estimation

tools are critical in the estimation of performance levels of fligh

and ground crew, as well as ATC personnel. These performance

estimates are used for risk assessment and risk mitigation

through crew scheduling. Fatigue models, which form the basis

of such tools, are intended to move beyond simple flight and

duty time limits and address individual fatigue levels and

performance based on factors that reflect the individual's

physiology, work, and rest patterns.

While fatigue models have advanced greatly over the past 20

years, there still is need for improvement. The emerging gaps

identified by the working group as needing further research

and development are:

How should the fatigue problem be defined, measured, and

understood?

How should aviation-relevant models be designed and

developed?

How should models be developed such that they take into

account inter-individual performance variations?

How can fatigue models and evaluation methods be

designed to incorporate plans for evaluation, validation,

transitioning, and proper use cases?

Modeling Working Group

iStockphot

Modeling

2 Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), Human Factors Section, March 2010, Biomathematical Fatigue Modeling in Civil Aviation Fatigue Risk Management: Application Guidance, Civil Aviation Safety Authority.


22/28

The mitigation of human fatigue in the aviation industry

requires a flexible, multifaceted approach; one that is

operationally efficient to implement and that can adapt to the

unique and continually changing environment. The roadmap

initiative intends to heighten the awareness of the issues

complexity and foster a collaborative approach for developing

a comprehensive roadmap.

Roadmap Process

This initiative is designed to be open, flexible, and collaborative.

The roadmap is a living resource that will change as the needs

of the participants evolve. During this initial phase, the

conceptual process by which the initiative will move forward is

represented in the process graphic below. The initiative process

is organized into seven stages and nine steps. The seven stages

include Identification, Resourcing, Research, Prevention,

Mitigation, Intervention, and Implementation. At each stage in

the process, icons represent participating entities such as

stakeholders, the TAP, working groups, and supporting

communities. Additional icons indicate responsible participants

active participants, or inactive participants.

The Identificationstage encompasses the first two steps in the

initiative process (the origination of issues from various sources

and TAP review). At the first stage (origination of issues), all

The Way ForwardThe Way Forward

Prevention

Rese

arch

Implem

enta

tion

Identification

Resour

cing

Issuesoriginatefrom varioussources

1

TAPreview

2

Prioritizingissues forentity to matchwith resources

3

Resource

allocation

4

Researchcompleted

5Results reported,shared &archived

6

Monitoring9

Recommen-dations

7

Implementa-tion: processand policy

8

M

itigation

Intervention

Stakeholders

TAP

Scheduled Operations

On-Demand Operations

Shift Work

Tools

Modeling

Operational Flight

Operational Non-Flight

Research

Industry

Working Groups

SupportingCommunities

Direction ofcommunication

New issue

Active Participant

Inactive Participant

Responsible Participant

Process


23/28

participants are active and responsible for bringing fatigue

issues to the TAP for investigation. Anyone can bring an issue

to the TAP for review and consideration. At the second step,

TAP review, the TAP and the working groups are active, but the

TAP is ultimately responsible for deciding which issues or

research projects proceed to the Resourcing stage.

The Resourcingstage includes two steps: the prioritization of

issues to match with resources and resource allocation. In the

third step (prioritization of issues), only the TAP and the

stakeholders are active and discuss the issues brought to them.

In this step, the TAP is responsible for prioritizing the issues

reviewed. In step four, stakeholders and supporting

communities are active, and resources are allocated to the

communities responsible for the necessary research.

The Researchstage, step five, is the step at which research is

completed. Stakeholders, the TAP, working groups, and

supporting communities are all active during this stage. The

supporting communities are those responsible for the research

at this step, even though other groups may be involved.

The Prevention, Mitigation, and Interventionstages encompass

steps six and seven (results reported, shared, and archived,

and the development of recommendations). The TAP, working

groups, and supporting communities are active during step

six. Working group members are responsible for reporting,

sharing, and archiving research results. In step seven

(recommendations), all groups, including stakeholders, the

TAP, working groups, and supporting communities, are

active. Ultimately, it is the working groups who are

responsible for publishing the recommendations resultingfrom the research.

The final stage in the process is the Implementationstage. It

includes steps eight and nine (process and policy, and

monitoring). In step eight, only the stakeholders and the TAP

are active. The stakeholders are responsible for the

implementation of the recommendations developed in the

previous step. In step nine (monitoring), the stakeholders, the

TAP, working groups, and supporting communities are all

active. At this step, the stakeholders are responsible for

monitoring the changes in policy that resulted from the

recommendations developed in the previous stage.

Going forward, it is anticipated that the following will be some

of the initial milestones for the Aviation Fatigue Research

Roadmap initiative:

Finalize working group membership. It is expected that

additional participants will join working groups already in

the formation process.

Discuss the list of gaps developed during the symposium

with members of the working group, and craft plans for

how the working group will address these gaps.

Develop an online portal website to facilitate

communication and collaboration within and among the

working groups, the TAP, and stakeholders.

Revise, update, finalize, and publish (to the portal site) the

working groups prioritized list of gaps from the symposium

along with their individualized plans for moving

forward and addressing the gaps.

Communicate with points of contact for current fatigue

research initiatives to leverage results or processes from collaborative work in progress.

Develop a governance model that will be used to move

forward and guide future roadmap activities.

19


24/28

ALPA Air Line Pilots Association

ATA Air Transport Association

ATC Air Traffic Control

CAMI Civil Aerospace Medical Institute

CASA Civil Aviation Safety Authority

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CSSRT Crew Safety and Security Research Team

DoD Department of Defense

DoT Department of Transportation

EMS Emergency Medical Services

FAA Federal Aviation Administration

FASTTM Fatigue Avoidance and Safety Tool

FRMS Fatigue Risk Management System

HEMS Helicopter Emergency Medical Services

IATA International Air Transport Association

ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization

MEC Master Executive Council

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NATCA National Air Traffic Controllers Association

NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

NTSB National Transportation Safety Board

PATCO Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization

RAA Regional Airline Association

SIRA System Integrated Risk Assessment

SSC Scientific Steering Committee

TAP Technical Advisory Panel

UAS Unmanned Aircraft Systems

ULR Ultra-Long Range

U.S. United States

Acronyms


25/28

21

Appendix


26/28

Examples of Aviation Fatigue-related Accidents and Incidents

Resulting Actions/Select NTSB RecommendationsAccidents/Incidents/Events

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

Chicago & Southern Airlines Peoria, IL

American Airlines 3 Little Rock, AR

Universal Airways Gulfport, MS

Korean Air2 Nimitz Hill, Guam

Shuttle Americao 6 Cleveland, OH

Comairn 5 Lexington, KY

Bali Hai Helicopter Tours Kalaheo, HICorporate Airlinesp Kirksville, MO

ValuJet Airlines l 1 Miami, FLContinental Airlines Houston, TX

Air Transport InternationalKansas City, MO

American International AirwaysGuantanamo Bay, Cuba

Atlantic Southeast Airlinesh Brunswick, GA

Continental Expressk Pine Bluff, AR

Grand Canyon Airlines & HelitechGrand Canyon National Park, AZ

United Airlines Detroit, MI

Air New England Hyannis, MA

Professional Air Traffic Controllers

Organization (PATCO)strike d

FedEx 4 Tallahassee, FL

Pinnacle Airlines 7 Traverse City, MI

Mesa Airliness t 8 Hilo, HI

Maryland State Police EMS9 District Heights, MD

Colgan Airu Buffalo, NY

a

b

c

e

f

g

ij

m

r

d

k

qp

v

h

l

n

u

s t

o

a- NASA initiates study to examine the effects of fatigue on decision-making in an

aircraft simulatorb- NASA initiates Fatigue/Jet Lag Program at Ames Research Center

c- Special investigation of the ATC system of the U.S. to monitor the emergence of fatigue and stress in controllers which may result from extended work hours and heavier workloads as a result of the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization (PATCO) strike

d - NTSB: Establish and implement a program to detect the onset of, and to alleviate, controller fatigue and stress (A-81-145)

e- NTSB: Develop and conduct a research program to measure the effect of emergency medical service (EMS) pilot workload, shift lengths, and circadian rhythm disruptions (A-88-019)

f - NTSB adds human fatigue to their list of Most Wanted Transportation Safety Improvements for aviation

g- NASA initiates Fatigue Countermeasures Program at Ames Research Center

h - NTSB:Advise members that the intent of the reduced rest provisions of14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 135.265 is not to routinely schedule

reduced rest, but to allow for unexpected operational delays (A-92-030)

i - Controlled rest on the flight deck successfully implemented by some foreign air carriers

j - NTSB: Require U.S. air carriers operating under 14 CFR Part 121 to includea program to educate pilots about detrimental effects of fatigue, and strategies foravoiding fatigue and countering its effects (A-94-005)

k - NTSB: Require that 14 CFR Part 135 air carriers provide aircrews information on fatigue countermeasures relevant to the duty/rest schedules being flown (A-94-073)

l - NTSB: Review the issue of personnel fatigue in aviation maintenance (A-97-071)

m - ICAO establishes Operations Panel Fatigue Risk Management Sub-Group to

develop an international regulatory framework for fatigue risk management in commercial aviation

n - NTSB: Develop a fatigue awareness and countermeasures training program forcontrollers and personnel who are involved in scheduling controllers (A-07-031)

o - NTSB: Develop a specific, standardized policy for 14 CFR Part 121, 135, and Part 91 subpart K operators that would allow flight crewmembers to decline assignments or remove themselves from duty if they were impaired by a lack of sleep (A-08-019)

p - NTSB: Develop guidance, based on empirical and scientific evidence, for operators to establish fatigue management systems (A-08-044, supercedes A-06-11)

q- FAA sponsors the international Aviation Fatigue Management Symposium: Partnerships for Solutions

r - U.S. DoT hosts the second International Conference on Fatigue Management in Transportation Operations

s - NTSB: Modify the Application for Airman Medical Certificate to elicit specific information about previous diagnoses of obstructive sleep apnea and the presence of specific risk factors for that disorder (A-09-061)

t - NTSB: Conduct research examining how pilot fatigue is affected by the unique characteristics of short-haul operations (A-09-064)

u - NTSB: Require all 14 CFR Part 121, 135, and 91K operators to address fatigue risks associated with commuting, including identifying pilots who commute, establishing policy and guidance to mitigate fatigue risks for commuting pilots, using scheduling practices to minimize opportunities for fatigue in commuting

pilots, and developing or identifying rest facilities for commuting pilots (A-10-016)

v - FAA publishes updated Flight/Duty Time & Rest Regulations Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)

x = Direct outcome from accident/incident/eventAir carr ier name d = Letter denotes corresponding recommendation

Air carr ier name 1 = Number denotes corresponding photo


27/28

23

FedEx Flight 1478, 2002 AP4

6 Shuttle America Flight 6448, 2007 NTSB

5 Comair Flight 5191, 2006 AP

Pinnacle Airl ines Flight 4712, 2007 NTSB

7

8 Mesa Airlines Flight 1002, 2008 AP

1 ValuJet Airl ines Flight 592, 1996 AP defense.gov

2 Korean Air Flight 801, 1997

American Airlines Flight 1420, 1999 NTSB

3

9 Maryland State Police EMS N92MD, 2008 AP


28/28

Copyright 2011

Approved for Public Release 11-2695

www.aviationfatigue.aero

Date post:	04-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	cao-minh-tri
View:	216 times
Download:	0 times

av_fatigue_book_052411_low_res.pdf

Documents