Safety and efficiency are two of the most important goals of the national airspace system (NAS). However, these goals are typically viewed as competing or independent, rather than complementary. The complementary aspect of safety and efficiency is illustrated from the point of view of human factors and ergonomics. Statistical methods were used to analyze safety and efficiency performance measurements, operational errors, and daily flight time index (DFTI). Factors related to weather and complexity were found to be more likely on days with poor operational performance as measured by DFTI. The results indicate a positive relationship between NAS safety and efficiency and imply that NAS safety performance may be improved by increasing efficiency, and vice versa.
DanaherJ. W.Human Error in ATC System Operations. Human Factors, Vol. 22, No. 5, Oct.1980, pp. 535–545.
3.
RusmussenJ., and JensenA.. Mental Procedures in Real-Life Tasks: Case Study of Electronic Troubleshooting. Ergonomics, No. 17, 1974, pp. 293–307.
4.
ReasonJ.Human Error. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1990.
5.
BeaR.Human and Organizational Factors: Risk Assessment and Management of Engineered Systems. Ocean Engineering Services, Moraga, Calif., 2001.
6.
WatsonI. A.Human Factors in Reliability and Risk Assessment. In The Safety Practitioner, New York, 1986.
7.
DoughertyE. M., and CollinsE. P.. Assessing the Reliability of Skilled Performance. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Vol. 51, 1996.
8.
KinneyG. C., SpahnJ., and AmatoR. A.. Human Element in Air Traffic Control: Observations and Analyses of the Performance of Controllers and Supervisor in Providing ATC Separation Services. Report No. MTR-7655.METREK Division, MITRE Corporation, McLean, Va., 1997.
9.
RodgersM. D., MogfordR. H., and MogfordL. S.Relationship of Sector Characteristics to Operational Errors. Report No. DOT/FAA/AM-98/14.FAA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1998.
10.
EmpsonJ.Error Auditing in Air Traffic Control Information System: Failure Analysis. Proc., NATO Advanced Workshop, Springer-Valeg, New York, 1987, pp. 191–198.
11.
BertelsonP., BooneJ. P., and RenkinA.. Vitesse Libre et Vitesse Impose dans une Tache Stimulant le Tri Mechanique do la Correspondence. Ergonomics, No. 8, 1965, pp. 3–22.
12.
MogfordR. H., MurphyE. D., YastropG., GuttmanJ. A., and Roske-HofstrandR. J.. Application of Research Techniques for Documenting Cognitive Process in Air Traffic Control. Report No. DOT/FAA/CT-TN93/39.FAA, U.S. Department of Transportation, Atlantic City, N.J., 1993.
13.
FowlerF. D.Air Traffic Control Problem: Pilot's View. Human Factors, Vol. 22, No. 6, 1980, pp. 645–653.
14.
SchroederD. J., and NyeL. G.. Examination of the Workload Conditions Associated with Operational Errors/Deviations at Air Route Traffic Control Centers. Report No. DOT/FAA/AM-93/22.FAA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1993.
15.
LaudemanI. V., SheldenS. G., BranstormR., and BrasilC. L.. Dynamic Density: Air Traffic Management Metric. NAS Advanced Concepts Branch, FAA, U.S. Department of Transportation, March2000.
16.
ReasonJ.How to Promote Error Tolerance in Complex Systems in the Context of Ships and Aircraft. Presented at Safety at Sea and in the Air-Taking Stock Together Symposium, Nautical Institute, London, 1991.
17.
HansenM., and WeiW.. Multivariate Analysis of the Impacts of NAS Investments: Case Study of a Major Capacity Expansion at Dallas-Fort Worth Airport. Report No. NR-1998-016.Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California at Berkeley, Jan.1999.
18.
RoseN. L.Profitability and Product Quality: Economic Determinants of Airline Safety Performance. In The Economics of Transport, Volume II, Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, 1994.
19.
DattaK., and OliverR. M.. Predicting Risk of Near-Midair Collisions in Controlled Airspace. Transportation Research B, Vol. 25, No. 4, 1991, pp. 237–252.
20.
HansenM., and BolicT.. Normalization of Airport and Terminal Area Operational Performance: Case Study of Los Angeles International Airport. Presented at U.S.-Europe Air Traffic Management Research and Development Seminar: Metrics, Weather, Environment, Santa Fe, N.Mex., 2001.
21.
GoslingG. D.Analysis of Factors Affecting the Occurrence and Severity of Air Traffic Control Operational Errors. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1788, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2003, pp. 49–57.
