This individual report analyses and assess, using human factors at least two aviation incidents (Asiana Flight 214 and Air France Flight 447) through determining and commenting upon the similarities, differences, lesson learned and recommendations.
- Determine the safety management system in the context of Asiana Flight 214 and Air France Flight 447.
- Evaluate the analysis of the study and describe what lesson has been learned.
- Provide a recommendation on the basis of overall analysis and study.
In this current assignment there would be dealing with the human factors which are affecting or causing accidents and incidents. This is that form of influencing cause that is inviting accidents to occur or happen which despite of training and development programs are forming condition to penetrate accidents. There would be learning and recommendations on what were the human factor which caused the incident of two flights into aviation industry namely Air France Flight 447 and Asiana Airline Flight 214. Furthermore maintenance issues and recommendations would be also made at the end of report.
Safety management system (SMS)
This is the very important systemic approach which includes managing and tracking safety and security into the aviation industry under this safety management system (SMS) there would be major element that are included. Various factors like that of accountabilities, policies, organisational structure and procedures in other words they are those factors that are including fully structured safety programs (Lyu, Nandiganahalli and Hwang, 2018). As the chance of errors, accidents, incidents and human or natural factors affecting all these are very much common into aviation industry the two most prominent examples are that of Asiana Airline Flight 214 and Air France Flight 447.
Air France Flight 447-
This aircraft was scheduled on 1st June 2009 from Rio de Janeiro to Paris which was crashed in Atlantic Ocean with the death of all 216 passengers and 12 crewmember. The investigation was hampered due to not recovering of Black Box till 2 years of the accidents from the ocean floor. Then after this on 5th July 2012 it was concluded from the investigation by BEA that aircraft was crashed due to mismanagement of aircraft speed as the pilots tube was damaged by ice crystals and this caused autopilot top disconnect (Wendel, 2018). Then after this crewmembers also reacted in wrong manner which lead to entry of aircraft into aerodynamic stall and not recovering from that situation.
This mishandling and misconduct lead to crash of aircraft in the mid of its traveling lack of knowledge of crewmembers and then unreliable airspeed measure procedure was two of the major cause of crash.
Asiana Airline Flight 214-
This particular flight which was schedule from South Korea to San Francisco International Airport (SFO) on Saturday morning of July 6 2013 crashed with 307 total people including passengers and crewmembers. Amongst all 2 of them died at the incident spot and 3rd one days after the accident in hospital all of them were recognise as Chinese students. On this incident the final report was issued on 24th June 2014 it was included that the accident was majorly caused due to mismanagement of approaches and there was not correct monitoring of speed of aircraft which led to crash of flight (Jackson and Harel, 2018). In was also found in the report of NTSB that captain of flight had selected wrong autopilot mode and then this resulted into auto throttle which was not able to control speed of aircraft.
The captain of the flight was not using his correct mental mode of automation logic which deactivated the automatic airspeed control. The Asiana automation was having policy of use of automation and not encouraging the crewmembers to use manual mode during line operations. At the end of all allegations and reporting the airlines officials included that they would be improving training and development courses of their crewmembers especially that of pilots (Asiana asked to review safety measures 2 months before crash, 2018). They would be conducting their training on various types of aircraft and also into making visual approaches so that they could fly on autopilot. Some more improvements were to be included like that of betterment of communication between crewmembers, managing risk of fatigue stress most importantly improving safety management systems.
As in was included that lack of training and communication between crewmembers of flight led to its crash as there were enough of technological advancements (Dismukes, Kochan and Goldsmith, 2018). As it was included that ministry of South Korean government 2 months before the crash instructed Asiana that they must be reviewing safety measures. In centralising their SMS consulting so that they could be easily setting up oversight team for aircraft maintenance this was also recommended by ministry of government. In addition to this South Korean government said that due to increase in airlines fleet size up to 20% in 2017 they should also be increasing their employees including all pilots, engineers and cabin crew.
In both these cases which was due to the human factors and lack of communication are having many lesson which could be summarised. Human errors during the flights and operations was regarded to as simple yet persistent directly causing accidents which is possible factor contributing into crash (Hickey and Van Arsdell, 2018).
- It was learnt that companies of airlines should be focusing on training and development of their crewmembers and pilots so that they are managing all their task while their flights.
- All the technical features and tools must be checked and improvised if any faults are found display in flights must not be misleading which could be reason of crash in both the flights.
- There must clear display of airspeed inconstancies which could be leading to problems and accidents also generation of message could fail.
- As they were given the instruction from government to modify or change their safety management system which they simply overlooked should not be done and Asiana airlines must be including this as into their program (Dominiczak and Khansa, 2018).
- It was also learnt that lack of communication could be lead to many types of errors which company should take into account and then correct it on timely bases.
It was included that training and development of the crewmembers and that of all staff is must and most necessary element of aviation industry as there are chance of human error and accidents which is highest. Every equipment’s and tools like that of engines, landing tools and others must be kept under checking which must is as per the rules and policy. Crewmembers must be trained that what they need to do at the time of emergency or any victim is been stacked in somewhere. The most important recommendation which is to be made include that of lessening down chance of mismanagement that is regarded to as the most important reason of crash of both flights. It was also important that crewmember at the time of their dealing passengers should not be feeling any kind of fatigue which is another form of reason which may cause. As the polite if is feeling mentally stress out or not able to manage all his work would never be able to handle situations and then this may cause failure of flights.
Maintenance Issues and Models
The major issue which could be raised is that if human factor and then their maintenance they could also be following mistakes in their procedure. As this was done in managing their work, training them so that they are well through rules, policies and procedures of company and that of aviation industry on whole. Airlines should be employing more personals who would be looking out for their maintenance as this industry is the most growing one in world. Shortage of personal and all other professionals in industry is one of the major maintenance issues which need to be solved out.
Safety management system or simply SMS is the most important model of maintenance issues which is helping them to carry out their work in more clear and easy sense (Safety Management System, 2018). Which is known as that method which is undertaking all safety measurement and management by that organisation so that they would be able to achieve acceptable or tolerable safety. With the help of this model aviation industry would be able to follow all ways of what to do and rather than how to do them.