• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

飞机事故中的人为因素:一项为期7年的研究结果

Human factors in aircraft incidents: results of a 7-year study.

作者信息

Billings C E, Reynard W D

出版信息

Aviat Space Environ Med. 1984 Oct;55(10):960-5.

PMID:6497826
Abstract

Human error causes or contributes to considerably over half of all aviation mishaps. This report describes a 7-year study of aircraft incident data conducted in an attempt to further our understanding of the phenomenon of human error. The study of incidents as a surrogate for aircraft accidents is relevant only if incidents constitute a population or universe of which accidents are a subset. This assumption has been examined in a study of over 35,000 reports of aviation incidents collected from 1976-83 by the NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System. One-third of the reports involve conflicts among aircraft. The most common single-aircraft anomalies in flight involve altitude or track deviations. The most common controller errors involve failure to coordinate traffic with other elements of the air traffic control system. Analysis of these reports indicates that both human and system factors contributing to human errors can be identified. Many other incidents involve shortcomings specifically of the human, rather than of the system. Failures of control are rare in this series, but failures of decision-making and cockpit resource management are frequent. Boredom, complacency and ennui appear to underlie some failures, while very high workloads are associated with others. These data indicate that at least several categories of aircraft accidents involving operational and human factors are, in fact, subsets of populations of incidents containing the same elements. The environment in which an incident occurs is extremely important in determining its outcome. It is concluded that aviation incident reports are a necessary and important instrument in safety surveillance.

摘要

人为失误导致或促成了超过半数的航空事故。本报告描述了一项为期7年的飞机事故数据研究,旨在加深我们对人为失误现象的理解。仅当事故构成一个总体,而事故是其中的一个子集时,将事故作为飞机事故的替代进行研究才具有相关性。这一假设已在一项研究中得到检验,该研究分析了美国国家航空航天局(NASA)航空安全报告系统在1976年至1983年期间收集的35000多份航空事故报告。三分之一的报告涉及飞机之间的冲突。飞行中最常见的单机异常情况涉及高度或航线偏差。管制员最常见的错误是未能与空中交通管制系统的其他要素协调交通。对这些报告的分析表明,导致人为失误的人为因素和系统因素都可以被识别出来。许多其他事故具体涉及人为而非系统的缺陷。在这一系列事故中,控制失误很少见,但决策失误和驾驶舱资源管理失误很常见。无聊、自满和倦怠似乎是一些失误的根源,而其他失误则与极高的工作量有关。这些数据表明,至少几类涉及操作和人为因素的飞机事故实际上是包含相同要素的事故总体的子集。事故发生的环境对于决定其结果极为重要。结论是,航空事故报告是安全监督中必要且重要的工具。

相似文献

1
Human factors in aircraft incidents: results of a 7-year study.飞机事故中的人为因素:一项为期7年的研究结果
Aviat Space Environ Med. 1984 Oct;55(10):960-5.
2
Human factors in remotely piloted aircraft operations: HFACS analysis of 221 mishaps over 10 years.遥控飞机操作中的人为因素:对10年间221起事故的HFACS分析
Aviat Space Environ Med. 2006 Jul;77(7):724-32.
3
Human error and crew resource management failures in Naval aviation mishaps: a review of U.S. Naval Safety Center data, 1990-96.海军航空事故中的人为失误与机组资源管理故障:对美国海军安全中心1990 - 1996年数据的回顾
Aviat Space Environ Med. 1999 Dec;70(12):1147-51.
4
Analysis of 2004 German general aviation aircraft accidents according to the HFACS model.根据HFACS模型对2004年德国通用航空飞机事故进行分析。
Air Med J. 2006 Nov-Dec;25(6):265-9. doi: 10.1016/j.amj.2006.03.003.
5
Eastern minds in western cockpits: meta-analysis of human factors in mishaps from three nations.西方驾驶舱中的东方思维:对三个国家事故中人为因素的荟萃分析
Aviat Space Environ Med. 2007 Apr;78(4):420-5.
6
Aircraft accidents and incidents associated with visual effects from bright light exposures during low-light flight operations.与低光飞行操作期间强光照射造成的视觉效果相关的飞机事故和事件。
Optometry. 2007 Aug;78(8):415-20. doi: 10.1016/j.optm.2006.11.016.
7
Aviation accidents and incidents associated with the use of ophthalmic devices by civilian airmen.民航飞行员使用眼科设备相关的航空事故和事件。
Aviat Space Environ Med. 2002 Nov;73(11):1109-13.
8
Human factors analysis and classification system applied to civil aircraft accidents in India.应用于印度民航事故的人为因素分析与分类系统。
Aviat Space Environ Med. 2005 May;76(5):501-5.
9
Pilot behaviors in the face of adverse weather: A new look at an old problem.面对恶劣天气时的飞行员行为:对一个老问题的新审视。
Aviat Space Environ Med. 2005 Jun;76(6):552-9.
10
Ultralight aviation accident factors and latent failures: a 66-case study.超轻型航空事故因素与潜在故障:一项66例的研究
Aviat Space Environ Med. 2006 Sep;77(9):950-2.

引用本文的文献

1
Differing Visual Behavior Between Inexperienced and Experienced Critical Care Nurses While Using a Closed-Loop Ventilation System-A Prospective Observational Study.使用闭环通气系统时,经验不足与经验丰富的重症监护护士之间不同的视觉行为——一项前瞻性观察研究
Front Med (Lausanne). 2021 Sep 8;8:681321. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2021.681321. eCollection 2021.
2
[Assessment of physicians? : Results of a sample analysis for the selection of physicians for staff positions].[医生评估?:为员工岗位选拔医生的抽样分析结果]
Urologe A. 2017 Nov;56(11):1450-1454. doi: 10.1007/s00120-017-0423-3.
3
[Human factors in medicine].
[医学中的人为因素]
Anaesthesist. 2017 Jan;66(1):63-80. doi: 10.1007/s00101-016-0261-5.
4
[Human factors in medicine].[医学中的人为因素]
Urologe A. 2017 Jan;56(1):97-113. doi: 10.1007/s00120-016-0302-3.
5
[Better apprehension of errors in the early clinical treatment of the severely injured].[提高对严重创伤早期临床治疗中错误的认识]
Unfallchirurg. 2015 Aug;118(8):675-85. doi: 10.1007/s00113-015-0029-4.
6
The association of sleep deprivation on the occurrence of errors by nurses who work the night shift.睡眠剥夺与值夜班护士发生差错之间的关联。
Curr Health Sci J. 2014 Apr-Jun;40(2):97-103. doi: 10.12865/CHSJ.40.02.03. Epub 2014 Mar 29.
7
Patient monitoring alarms in the ICU and in the operating room.重症监护病房和手术室中的患者监测警报。
Crit Care. 2013 Mar 19;17(2):216. doi: 10.1186/cc12525.
8
Improving teamwork, confidence, and collaboration among members of a pediatric cardiovascular intensive care unit multidisciplinary team using simulation-based team training.通过基于模拟的团队培训提高儿科心血管重症监护病房多学科团队成员之间的团队合作、信心和协作能力。
Pediatr Cardiol. 2013 Mar;34(3):612-9. doi: 10.1007/s00246-012-0506-2. Epub 2012 Sep 13.
9
Team performance in resuscitation teams: comparison and critique of two recently developed scoring tools.复苏团队中的团队表现:两种新开发评分工具的比较和评价。
Resuscitation. 2012 Dec;83(12):1478-83. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2012.04.015. Epub 2012 May 3.
10
[Effects of intraoperative reading : Impact on vigilance and workload].
Anaesthesist. 2010 Aug;59(8):736-8. doi: 10.1007/s00101-010-1750-6.