AbstractsPsychology

A validity framework theory and fatigue damage function for an S–N plane

by Christine Ellen Carrick




Institution: University of Newcastle
Department:
Year: 2016
Keywords: airmanship; human factors; skills; training
Posted: 02/05/2017
Record ID: 2088271
Full text PDF: http://hdl.handle.net/1959.13/1313666


Abstract

Research Doctorate - Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) The current project involved investigation into the understanding of airmanship among Australian aviators and the way in which airmanship is trained in Australia. The starting point was Kern’s model of airmanship (1996, 2009a), developed from research with aviators in the USA. The current research revealed two insufficiencies in the Kern model. First that it includes few of the non-technical skills that become important as an aviation career progresses, and secondly it emphasises knowledge over application. The Ebbage and Spencer (2003) model of airmanship, developed in the UK, includes non-technical skills more overtly and some additional concepts not included in the Kern model. Both Kern and Ebbage and Spencer recommend that training of airmanship should include three phases: 1) instil the importance of airmanship; 2) overtly teach and model airmanship; and 3) assess and provide feedback. In the current project, an initial on-line survey reached mainly general aviation pilots. The participants mentioned many of the concepts included in the existing models but also some additional concepts. A second survey reached more participants and enabled comparison of differences in views between military and civilian background aviators. It also established the relative importance placed by the participants on the component concepts of airmanship. A third study involved the interviewing of a cross-section of flight instructors and trainers from civilian and military sectors, at ab-initio and advanced levels of training. It appears that the training of airmanship generally meets the final two phases of the suggested training process, but there seemed to be a lack of formal introduction to airmanship and no use of a structure to facilitate development of airmanship. A model of airmanship was developed and its structure tested empirically. A revised model is presented, which provides a more balanced approach to the importance of the component concepts than earlier models and also recognises the influence of context on the development and expression of airmanship. The use of the revised model to expressly embed airmanship in training programs may alleviate the paradox of the use of the term ‘airmanship’ both as a global expression of safe and efficient flight and also to describe only the non-technical skills component, in some training environments. Advisors/Committee Members: University of Newcastle. Faculty of Science & Information Technology, School of Psychology.