This project investigated the use of weather radar displays in
commercial aviation. Three studies are described.
The first study used an expertise model of the use of weather
radar displays to classify aircraft accident and incident reports.
The three data sources used were the Federal Aviation
Administration Accident/Incident Data System, the National
Transportation Safety Board Accident and Incident Database, and the
Aviation Safety Reporting System. Although generalisation of the
outcomes is limited, the results provide some evidence to suggest
that where the use of weather radar was implicated in an aircraft
accident or incident, the error was most likely to be associated
with a failure to recognise and/or interpret the information on the
display.
Study Two involved a cognitive interview of experienced
commercial pilots and their use of weather radar displays to assist
in the management of flight. The results revealed a relatively
consistent response which emphasised the timely and accurate
interpretation of radar 'paints' as the basis for successful
performance. It was apparent that, for some pilots, the process
involved the development and application of''rules-of-thumb' and
that these rules had been acquired through experience.
The results of Studies One and Two provided the basis for the
development of a survey that was distributed to pilots both in
hard-copy and on-line via the internet. Respondents were asked to
provide information about their use of weather radar displays,
describe an incident involving the use or misuse of weather radar
displays, and give their interpretations of a series of 12
simulated weather radar 'paints'. In the case of the incidents
described by the respondents, the results indicated that the
majority of cases were related to the recognition and
interpretation of the information on displays, consistent with the
outcomes of Study One.
In relation to the simulated weather radar 'paints', the results
indicated that while the interpretation of some of the displays was
relatively consistent, the responses to other displays were less
consistent between respondents. These differences were not due to
demographic features such as age or experience, but appeared due to
the level of ambiguity associated with the displays. Specifically,
for some displays, it appeared that the key cues necessary for the
successful interpretation of the information were either difficult
to interpret or were absent. This outcome forms the basis for a
number of recommendations concerning improvements in training,
education and the design of weather radar displays.