Aircraft Accident and Human Factor Research Paper

Exclusively available on Available only on IvyPanda® Made by Human No AI

Abstract

The accident involving Flight 1420 that occurred on June 1, 1999, should not have happened. The flight crew had two human factor failure attributes. First, the responsible parties took the wrong approach to land under bad weather. Second, the flight crew made a skill-based error by failing to deploy the spoilers for a safe landing. The two errors fall under the first level of the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS).

Introduction

Aircraft accidents are rare, which makes this mode of transport the safest in contemporary times. However, aircraft accidents occur in some cases. According to the HFACS, such accidents occur due to a number of issues like organizational influences, unsafe acts, unsafe supervision, and preconditions for unsafe acts (Wiegmann & Shappell, 2003). This paper is an analysis of an aircraft accident that occurred on June 1, 1999, at Little Rock, Arkansas. The accident involved Flight 1420.

Key human factor failure

The most outstanding human factor failure is decision error, which falls under the broad category of the HFACS’ level 1 of unsafe acts. This human factor failure lies under the error subdivision. After the “second wind shear alert was received, the flight crew should have recognized that the approach to runway 4R should not continue because the maximum crosswind component for conducting the landing had been exceeded” (National Transportation Safety Board, 2001, p. 167).

Therefore, the cause, in this case, was the crew’s failure to make the appropriate decision to avoid landing under bad weather. Initially, the weather was favorable, and arguably, the flight crew had all the reasons to believe that they could get to the runway before the thunderstorm. However, the thunderstorm escalated rapidly, and at this point, the flight crew should have changed their course of action. Unfortunately, the crew did not make this critical decision, which led to the accident.

The second human factor failure is a skill-based error, which also falls under unsafe acts. Investigations revealed that the spoilers failed to deploy automatically because the “reverted rubber hydroplaning did not occur during the accident airplane’s landing rollout as the spoiler handle was not armed by either pilot before landing” (National Transportation Safety Board, 2001, p. 167). This aspect reveals a lack of requisite skills to handle such a scenario.

Conventionally, spoilers play a critical role in landing, and they should deploy in advance for safe landing (Collins, 2013). Therefore, the cause, in this case, was the pilots’ inability to spread the spoilers. The effect of this shortcoming was the resultant runway overrun of the aircraft.

The report concludes, “The lack of spoiler deployment was the single most important factor in the flight crew’s inability to stop the accident airplane within the available runway length” (National Transportation Safety Board, 2001, p. 168). If the crew had the requisite skills, they could have surmounted the rough weather challenge to land the aircraft safely.

The decision error to land under bad weather probably created panic, which unveiled the flight crew’s lack of skills to handle such a situation. Therefore, the chain started with poor decision making, which led to improper handling of the aircraft during landing, thus ultimately causing an accident.

Conclusion

Even though air transport is the safest mode of transport in the 21st Century, aircraft accidents occur at times. The American Airlines Flight 1420 runway overrun during landing happened due to two major human factor failures.

The two factors fall under level 1 of the HFACS, viz. decision errors, and skill-based errors, which are categorized under the errors section. The flight crew should have changed their approach after realizing that the thunderstorm had escalated faster than expected. In addition, the crew should have followed the set landing protocols.

References

Collins, M. (2013). Intentional Safety: A Reflection on Unsafe Flight. Bloomington, IN: Xlibris LLC.

National Transportation Safety Board. (2001). Runway Overrun during Landing, American Airlines Flight 1420, McDonnell Douglas MD-82, N215AA, Little Rock, Arkansas, June 1, 1999: Aircraft Accident Report NTSB/AAR-01/02. Washington, DC: NTSB.

Wiegmann, D., & Shappell, S. (2003). A Human Error Approach to Aviation Accident Analysis: The Human Factors Analysis and Classification System. Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing Company.

More related papers Related Essay Examples
Cite This paper
You're welcome to use this sample in your assignment. Be sure to cite it correctly

Reference

IvyPanda. (2020, May 2). Aircraft Accident and Human Factor. https://ivypanda.com/essays/aircraft-accident-and-human-factor/

Work Cited

"Aircraft Accident and Human Factor." IvyPanda, 2 May 2020, ivypanda.com/essays/aircraft-accident-and-human-factor/.

References

IvyPanda. (2020) 'Aircraft Accident and Human Factor'. 2 May.

References

IvyPanda. 2020. "Aircraft Accident and Human Factor." May 2, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/aircraft-accident-and-human-factor/.

1. IvyPanda. "Aircraft Accident and Human Factor." May 2, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/aircraft-accident-and-human-factor/.


Bibliography


IvyPanda. "Aircraft Accident and Human Factor." May 2, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/aircraft-accident-and-human-factor/.

If, for any reason, you believe that this content should not be published on our website, please request its removal.
Updated:
This academic paper example has been carefully picked, checked and refined by our editorial team.
No AI was involved: only quilified experts contributed.
You are free to use it for the following purposes:
  • To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
  • As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
  • As a template for you assignment
Privacy Settings

IvyPanda uses cookies and similar technologies to enhance your experience, enabling functionalities such as:

  • Basic site functions
  • Ensuring secure, safe transactions
  • Secure account login
  • Remembering account, browser, and regional preferences
  • Remembering privacy and security settings
  • Analyzing site traffic and usage
  • Personalized search, content, and recommendations
  • Displaying relevant, targeted ads on and off IvyPanda

Please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy for detailed information.

Required Cookies & Technologies
Always active

Certain technologies we use are essential for critical functions such as security and site integrity, account authentication, security and privacy preferences, internal site usage and maintenance data, and ensuring the site operates correctly for browsing and transactions.

Site Customization

Cookies and similar technologies are used to enhance your experience by:

  • Remembering general and regional preferences
  • Personalizing content, search, recommendations, and offers

Some functions, such as personalized recommendations, account preferences, or localization, may not work correctly without these technologies. For more details, please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy.

Personalized Advertising

To enable personalized advertising (such as interest-based ads), we may share your data with our marketing and advertising partners using cookies and other technologies. These partners may have their own information collected about you. Turning off the personalized advertising setting won't stop you from seeing IvyPanda ads, but it may make the ads you see less relevant or more repetitive.

Personalized advertising may be considered a "sale" or "sharing" of the information under California and other state privacy laws, and you may have the right to opt out. Turning off personalized advertising allows you to exercise your right to opt out. Learn more in IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy.

1 / 1