Cited by 70Human-Automation Interaction and SafetyAerospace and Aviation TechnologyMotor Control and Adaptation

Flying the Needles: Flight Deck Automation Erodes Fine-Motor Flying Skills Among Airline Pilots

Open access
Haslbeck, Andreas, Hoermann, Hans-Juergen·2016·Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of practice and training on fine-motor flying skills during a manual instrument landing system (ILS) approach. Background: There is an ongoing debate that manual flying skills of long-haul crews suffer from a lack of flight practice due to conducting only a few flights per month and the intensive use of automation. However, objective evidence is rare. Method: One hundred twenty-six randomly selected airline pilots had to perform a manual flight scenario with a raw data precision approach. Pilots were assigned to four equal groups according to their level of practice and training by fleet (short-haul, long-haul) and rank (first officer, captain). Results: Average ILS deviation scores differed significantly in relation to the group assignments. The strongest predictor variable was fleet, indicating degraded performance among long-haul pilots. Conclusion: Manual flying skills are subject to erosion due to a lack of practice on long-haul fleets: All results support the conclusion that recent flight practice is a significantly stronger predictor for fine-motor flying performance than the time period since flight school or even the total or type-specific flight experience. Application: Long-haul crews have to be supported in a timely manner by adequate training tailored to address manual skills or by operational provisions like mixed-fleet flying or more frequent transitions between short-haul and long-haul operation.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0018720816640394

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In aviation, manual flying skills can degrade from lack of practice when aircraft are highly automated, reducing pilots' opportunity to meet their competence need.

    “For example, in the aviation industry, manual flying skills can become degraded due to a lack of opportunity to practice when aircraft are highly automated99, decreasing the opportunity for pilots to meet their need for competence.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Civil Aviation Authority. (2014). Flight-crew human factors handbook: CAP 737. Gatwick Airport South. This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Sage Publishing in Human Factors on 13 Apr 2016, available online:http://hfs.sagepub.com/cgi/pmidlookup?view=long&pmid=27076096.
  2. Drappier, J. (2008). The erosion of manual flying skills in highly automated aircraft. Flight Comment, 2008(2), 33-36.
  3. Ebbatson, M. (2009). The Loss of Manual Flying Skills in Pilots of Highly Automated Airliners (PhD Thesis). Cranfield University, Cranfield.
  4. Commission Regulation (EU) No 1178/2011 of 3 November 2011, Volume 54 Official Journal of the European Union (European Union 2011).
  5. Fleishman, E. A. (1966). Human Abilities and the Acquisition of Skill: Comments on Professor Jones' Paper. In E. A. Bilodeau (Ed.), Acquisition of Skill (pp. 147-167). New York: Academic Press.
  6. Hubbard, D. C. (1987). Inadequacy of root mean square error as a performance measure. In International Symposium on Aviation Psychology, 4th (pp. 698-704).
  7. Puentes, A. (2011). The Manual Flight Skill of Airline Pilots (Master's Thesis). San Jose State University, San Jose. Retrieved from http://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/etd_theses/4109

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Haslbeck, A., & Hoermann, H.-J.
Affiliations
  • Technical University of Munich (DE)
  • Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt e. V. (DLR) (DE)
Corresponding author
Haslbeck, Andreas
Venue
Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
Published
2016-04-13
Volume
58
Issue
4
Pages
533-545
ISSN
  • 0018-7208 (ISSN-L)
  • 1547-8181
OpenAlex
W2338427307
Cited by
70
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1
FWCI
8.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • elib (German Aerospace Center) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Technologie
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › Aerospace and Aviation Technology
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
Keywords
flight automation, airline pilots, pilot training
MeSH terms
Work Performance, Pilots, Adult, Aircraft, Automation, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Motor Skills, Practice, Psychological

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review