{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0158004158004158, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.953757225433526, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Pilots’ Responses to Unexpected Events: Conceptual, Theoretical, Methodological, and Analytical Issues

ABSTRACT Objective We present a proactive perspective with respect to flight crew responses to novel, unexpected, surprising, and/or unanticipated aviation events. We identify ways to mitigate the brittleness of traditionally trained forms of pilot reaction by advocating for, and fostering the use of, concurrent adaptive and resilient response capacities during unexpected events. Background Aircraft operations are highly proceduralized events and specifications of pilots’ tasks as well as procedures of others involved in airspace operations have been major contributors to the overall safety of the National Airspace System. Furthermore, air traffic controllers are responsible for the safe separation of aircraft and also provide expeditious handling to achieve traffic schedules. One challenge that NextGen may pose is the adaptation to and overreliance on automation. Although NextGen systems include capabilities designed to optimize performance, when the flight crew becomes over-reliant on such capabilities, there is a risk they could fail to intervene with appropriate and timely actions in response to unexpected events; this is concerning for safety and efficiency in flight operations as humans are the greatest source of resilience in all complex socio-technical systems. Method To identify the especial importance of resilience, we have generated a synthesis of extant research through which to frame our proposed, proactive strategy. This approach particularly features discussions concerning the potential efficacy of resilience training, as well as encapsulating these proposals within a time-based framework concerning such unexpected events. Results Our synthesis illustrates and explicates the descriptive interrelationship of the identified resilience-related concepts. This step provides the insights which are critical to the foundation of subsequent empirical evaluations of needed training interventions. Conclusion Since the absolute frequency of off-nominal events appears to be increasing, these interventions promise to become progressively more important to operational safety. While the present focus is on flight crew capabilities, our current assessment can equally address a wider systems perspective and extend to operational domains well beyond aviation alone.