If you wish to contribute or participate in the discussions about articles you are invited to join SKYbrary as a registered user
Interruption or Distraction
From SKYbrary Wiki
| Article Information | ||
|---|---|---|
| Category: | Human Behaviour | 
|
| Content source: | SKYbrary | 
|
| Content control: | EUROCONTROL | 
|
Contents |
Description
Pilots and ATCOs perform lengthy and complex procedures in the course of their duties. An interruption breaks the thread of these procedures and can have undesirable consequences. Distractions can make it difficult for the pilot or ATCO to concentrate on the task in hand.
Types of Interruption
Interruption on the flight deck may result from causes within the aircraft, e.g. the occupant(s) of (the) flight deck supernumary crew seat (s), the activation of an caution or warning, the activation of a cabin crew call alert, unexpected information from ATC or the operating Company.
Interruption may also occur in the control room, e.g due to a telephone call, a message from a colleague or detection of a potential airspace infringement or level bust.
Types of Distraction
Examples of circumstances where distraction may occur on the flight deck include non-relevant conversation, equipment malfunction and adverse weather.
For the ATCO, distraction may result from extraneous noise, e.g. loud conversation between colleagues, or from an uncomfortable or inconvenient position.
Effects
On the flight deck, the interruption of a procedure may result in missing a vital checklist action, or failing to follow correctly a prescribed procedure.
In the control room, interruption may cause an ATCO to fail to take an intended action.
Distraction on the flight deck or in the control room may make it difficult for the pilot or ATCO to concentrate on his/her task, possibly resulting in error or omission.
Defences
Well designed and diligently applied SOPs should minimise the prevalence of or significant effect from interruptions and distractions. For example, the sterile flight deck procedure implemented by many airlines below FL100 reduces distractions and interruptions during situations which can be expected to create relatively high-workload situations during most flights. However, these arrangements are often not applied to critical elements of the pre flight departure performance calculations made by the crew prior to engine start at a time when the risk of interruption or distraction within or external to the crew is routinely high.
Typical Scenarios
- A flight deck checklist is interrupted by an interphone call from the cabin crew; the checklist is subsequently resumed but an important action is omitted.
- A discussion of non-relevant matters is carried out on the flight deck and none of the crew members present notice that they have entered an active runway without clearance.
- Cross checking of take off performance calculations being made in the flight deck prior to engine start is interrupted by the arrival of the dispatcher.
- An ATCO misses an important message due to a radio playing in the control room.
Contributory Factors
- Equipment malfunction or failure;
- Controller Position Design;
- Poor TRM;
- Inadequate SOPs.
Solutions
- Review and if necessary improve SOPs;
- Insist that SOPs are followed;
- Review and if necessary improve the design of the ATCO’s position;
- Review and if necessary improve CRM and TRM training provisions.
Accidents & Incidents
Events on the SKYbrary Accident and Incident Database where the Official Investigation included reference to Distraction as an element in causation:
- B752, en-route, vicinity Chancay Peru, 1996 (LOC AW HF) (On 2 October 1996, a Boeing 757-200 being operated by Aero Peru on a scheduled passenger flight at night from Lima to Santiago experienced control difficulties because of incorrect flight instrument readings. A return to Lima was attempted but when control was lost the aircraft impacted the sea and all 70 occupants were killed.)
- T154 / B752, en-route, Uberlingen Germany, 2002 (LOS HF) (On 1st July 2002, a Tu-154 collided with a B757 over Überlingen, Germany, following an ATC control lapse and failure of the TU154 to follow the coordinated TCAS RA guidance.)
- B763, Atlanta GA, USA 2009 (HF RE) (On 19 October 2009, a Boeing 767-300 being operated by Delta Airlines on a scheduled passenger flight from Rio de Janeiro to Atlanta inadvertently made a landing at destination in night VMC on parallel taxiway ‘M’ instead of the intended and ATC-cleared landing runway 27R. None of the 194 occupants were injured and there was no damage to the aircraft or conflict with other traffic or vehicles. The third rostered crew member had become incapacitated en route with the consequence that neither of the other pilots had been able to take any in flight rest.)
- T154, vicinity Svalbard Norway, 1996 (CFIT HF) (On 29 August 1996, a Tu-154, crashed after misflying an off-set LLZ non-precision approach to Svalbard Longyear airport, Norway, in IMC.)
- B190, vicinity Lihue Hawaii, 2008 (LOC HF) (On 14 January 2008, at night, a Hawker Beechcraft Corporation 1900C, was lost from radar over the ocean about 6.5 nautical miles south of the Lihue Airport, Lihue, Hawaii, located on the island of Kauai. The Alpine Air flight departed Honolulu International Airport, Honolulu, Hawaii, on the island of Oahu, at 0443, as AIP253 and was destined for Lihue. After departure the pilot was instructed to climb to 10 000 feet msl. About 9 minutes later flight AIP253 was cleared to descend at pilot discretion and maintain 2 000 feet. Later, the controller advised AIP 253 that he had traffic overtaking him and that he should expect a visual approach to follow the traffic. The flight was then transferred to advisory frequency. The airplane was lost from radar about 6.5 miles south-southeast of the airport. The airline transport pilot, who was not located, is presumed to have been killed, and the airplane was destroyed.)
- … further results
Related OGHFA Articles
- Managing Interruptions and Distractions (OGHFA BN)
- Attention and Vigilance (OGHFA BN)
- Discipline (OGHFA BN)