Introduction
Many aviation companies are faced with the overwhelming challenge of eliminating controlled flight in terrain (CFIT). The rate of accidents over the years has increased making the modern mass transportation means through air travel an issue of great concern. It is important to note that one of the major causes of accidents among aircrafts is the CFIT. Its accidents are normally due to lack of awareness of impending collisions by the crew controlling the aircraft. As a result, the air carrier is flown into the water mass, obstacles or terrain. This essay will explore the safety problems aviation face and suggest possible solution.
Safety problems
On a global scale, the safest means of transport has undoubtedly been air travel bearing in mind that hardly do we experience air mishaps as compared to land surface means of transport. However, a number of factors have contributed to CFIT accidents. These factors include organization of air carrier, aircraft equipment, airport and approach, environment and lack of awareness among flight crew (Palacios et al., 2010). Other related factors include human error, bad communication, equipment failures, high risk operations, ineffective scanning of instruments, inattention, complacency, task saturation as well as intentional and inadvertent flight into bad weather (Flottau, 2011; Cox, 2010; Gerzanics, 2010; Palacios et al., 2010).
Human error
To begin with, human error plays an important role in causing CFIT accidents. These errors range from drug and alcohol use by the pilots, homebuilt aircraft, use of student pilots, improper fuel management, on ground and in-flight judgment, unsterilized approach, inadequate flying skills, the inability of the flight crew and the pilot to communicate better due to lack of communication skills (Compart, 2011; Cox, 2010; Flottau, 2011; Palacios et al., 2010). CFIT accidents due to error by pilots occur when they fail to control aircraft during landing owing to lack of skills or disorientation (Berman & Dismukes, 2011). This can result into stalls or long and hard landings. Additionally, during approach and landing, accidents may occur when pilots fail to maintain a constant or reasonable descent rate and speed. Pilots are prone to making wrong on-ground and in-flight judgments during landing by not setting properly landing flaps, improper mixture of control, ignoring appropriate measures for carb icing and failing to read checklist (Gerzanics, 2010; Palacios et al., 2010). As such, pilots land on pastures, roads and uncertain terrains, fly into canyons and hit power lines (Compart, 2011).
Moreover, non-assertive behaviors and language barriers have resulted into the crew being unable to report a situation that could be critical to the air traffic controllers. This can be as a result of not being able to write, read or speak a common language (Berman & Dismukes, 2011; Palacios et al., 2010). Communication problems causes the flight crew to provide information that is not correct or accurate, fail to hear back and give wrong read back. For instance, during a fuel load, to avoid occurrence of fuel exhaustion there is need for the flight crew to communicate to the air traffic control for purposes of effective management (Gerzanics, 2010). Without proper communication, chances of occurrence of CFIT accident may be high.
Moreover, decisions made by the crew and the manner in which coordination is carried out resources may result into air carrier accidents. Human errors caused by improper use and coordination of resources availed for efficient and safe flight has been seen to play a huge role in causing CFIT accidents (Flottau, 2011). Additionally, poor decision making, lack of crew coordination to work as a team, delegate duties and communicate further contributes to unsafe travel in situations that are abnormal or adverse (Compart, 2011; Cox, 2010; Flottau, 2011; Gerzanics, 2010). For instance, in the case where there is need to evacuate passengers during an emergency after landing, wrong decisions, lack of coordination and proper delegation of responsibility among the crew and the pilots and failure to pay attention to alerts, warnings and signals in order to revise action may result into an accident.
Moreover, another human error occurs in runway incursions and poor airfield markings. It is important to note that flights that take off without consent from the tower in form of stand-bys or clearance easily cause accidents (Flottau, 2011; Palacios et al., 2010). Research studies indicate that pilots of air carriers who commit such errors are normally under pressure by the companies to ensure that the passengers are not inconvenienced and to keep with the rules regarding limits of duty time (Palacios et al., 2010). Accordingly, operations regarding landing and taking –off on the runway due to low laying clouds and fog may prove difficult to pilots in terms of making decisions and therefore any slight mistake may cause a CFIT accident (Berman & Dismukes, 2011). Other factors that may cause runway incursions are confusion in transmission of information especially when they occur at the same time, traffic congestion as well as inadequate language.
Additionally, human error has contributed to mid-air collisions. The distance between aircrafts when flying at high altitudes is controlled by the air traffic controllers (Compart, 2011; Palacios et al., 2010). They are able to inform pilots about how to avoid collision, how near the other plane is and what to see. Mid-air collisions normally occur when air controllers fail in their responsibility to give adequate and accurate information to pilots flying in the air (Gerzanics, 2010).
Failure to adhere to professional ethics, regulations and rules among the aircraft crews contributes to CFIT accidents (Gerzanics, 2010). It is important to note that in aviation, workers and the staff are offered rules and instructed on how to carry out operations during emergencies, abnormal and normal times. Additionally, they are taught how to compute performance, balance and weight, read weather patterns and organize flight plans (Berman & Dismukes, 2011; Cox, 2010; Flottau, 2011). Moreover, they are provided with rules on alcohol consumption, how to rest and when to fly. However, blatant violation of these rules and regulation through failing to adhere to prescribed procedures may result into making mistakes that cost human lives (Compart, 2011).
Weather and lack of awareness
Control flight into terrain accident caused due to weather occur when pilots fail to understand the weather conditions they want to fly into. Most pilots in such situations either disregard warnings about flying in worsening weather conditions or lack instrument rating. Research studies have indicated that over 78% of weather related CFIT accidents occur due to loss of control in instrument meteorological conditions by pilots (Palacios et al., 2010). It is important to note that these accidents may occur as a result of interference by weather elements such as fog, cloud cover, gusty crosswinds and so no as well as wet surfaces (Berman & Dismukes, 2011; Palacios et al., 2010). During landing, the latter plays an important role in causing accidents which can be fatal.
Weather patterns in the world keep changing and it may pose a problem of determining, projecting and predicting to navigators, pilots and meteorologists (Compart, 2011). The speed at which weather changes and deteriorates raises safety concerns among airlines as its effects on CFIT accidents is high (Cox, 2010; Flottau, 2011; Gerzanics, 2010). This can be attributed to failure by the pilots to predict the worsening weather conditions and determine routes which are safe to follow.
Obstacles brought about by weather elements can cause pilots to lose situational awareness and fly the aircraft into trees, water or terrain during landing. This could be due to lack of an effective terrain awareness warning system (TAWS) and a ground proximity warning system (GPWS) (Berman & Dismukes, 2011; Gerzanics, 2010). The latter is an important tool that warns pilots flying over water or level terrain and of CFIT that is impending and forthcoming. The warnings come in form of aural commands provided by the system informing the pilot to pull up or roll either left or right (Compart, 2011; Palacios et al., 2010).
Aircrafts that lack GPWS are unable to determine a forthcoming possibility of hitting water or ground because of lack of an inertial navigation system, air data computer, radalt and other sensor inputs provided by the algorithm GPWS software (Berman & Dismukes, 2011). Due to this, it becomes impossible to avoid imminent catastrophe since pilots don’t receive warnings or alerts in time (Flottau, 2011).
On the other hand, another safety system that most aircrafts causing CFIT accidents lack is TAWS. Awareness of the crew to the surrounding and the avoidance of ground impact depend on this system (Palacios et al., 2010). Additionally, it provides information on terrain and elevation via a database which is digital and a GPS (Berman & Dismukes, 2011; Compart, 2011). Studies have indicated that problems and mishaps due to lack of awareness by the flight crew frequently occur due to failure of aircrafts to be equipped with both TAWS and GPWS systems (Gerzanics, 2010; Palacios et al., 2010). Accordingly, these systems put to minimum nuisance warnings and offer protection against CFIT in situations of tactical and aggressive flight (Compart, 2011). Furthermore, they play an important role of providing a recovery path for flights that have lost balance and monitor real time altitude, attitude and real-time position of the aircraft (Flottau, 2011; Cox, 2010; Gerzanics, 2010).
According to records of CFIT accidents, domestic operations have been indicated as major areas that have been greatly affected (Berman & Dismukes, 2011; Gerzanics, 2010; Palacios et al., 2010). This is due to the fact that aircraft maps and chart have not been adequately provided to the to the flight crew since they are limited. Hence the flight crew lacks visual display of the terrain and knowledge on ground proximity.
Aircraft equipment
Aircraft equipment is one of the major components that ensures effective running of aviation activities. These activities include recreational and personal flights, maintenance of aircrafts, air shows, surveillance, firefighting, operations involving external loads and agriculture, corporate travel and trainings done to aircraft crews (Flottau, 2011; Gerzanics, 2010). Aircraft equipment comes in a wide variety that includes aircrafts, balloons, gliders, jets, helicopters and so on. Moat CFIT accidents related to aircraft equipment occurs when the equipments malfunction (Compart, 2011; Cox, 2010; Flottau, 2011; Palacios et al., 2010). This can be in terms of loss of control due to failure of a seat, homebuilt, structures, landing tires and gear, CFIT instruments, electrical instruments and engine failure.
CFIT accidents resulting from engine failure during take-off comes from contaminated fuel, ineffective engine controls, problems with the fuel tanks and fuel floe downstream, magnetos, turbos, engine parts, and propellers (Berman & Dismukes, 2011; Cox, 2010; Flottau, 2011). Failure to conduct a thorough check, inspect and investigate conditions of the aforementioned sections of the flight before takeoff leads to accidents. Other areas of concern include brakes, wheels, tires, landing gear and onboard instrument malfunctions (Palacios et al., 2010). Additionally, failures related to electricity, vertical and horizontal stabilizers, ailerons and other structural parts, flight surface controls and wings are contributing factors of CFIT accidents (Compart, 2011).
Aviation safety solution
To tackle the above mentioned problem effectively, there is need to begin with improving the conditions of the route and the airport. Aircrafts should be fitted with adequate machines such as GPWS, TAWS, secondary radar (SSR), transponder, distance measuring system and a VOR (Cox, 2010; Gerzanics, 2010). Additionally, aircrafts should have instrument landing systems ILF and the airfields should be expanded to create room for more runways. It is important to note that CFIT can be due to the weight exerted by heavy aircrafts on narrow runways (Compart, 2011; Gerzanics, 2010). Therefore, the runways should be expanded to ease landing and take-offs and appropriate management systems regarding soft tissue and flight be instituted (Flottau, 2011).
Besides, there is need ease traffic congestion of flights landing and taking off to avoid collisions. This can be achieved through better management of the routes, creating good ground facilities and increasing the efficiency of en-route facilities (Palacios et al., 2010; Berman & Dismukes, 2011). There is need to reduce the variance of CFIT risks through generous support and help from agencies and international organizations (Cox, 2010; Flottau, 2011 Palacios et al., 2010). This support can be technical or financial to improve the infrastructure in regional aircraft operations, air taxi and major air carriers. Strategies should be set to challenge and monitor errors as well as manage decision making by flight crews during challenging tactical situations (Compart, 2011).
Moreover, there is need to create situational awareness through improving flight approach charts. This can be done by shading or coloring areas of contours to represent different flight altitudes and terrains (Berman & Dismukes, 2011). Additionally, situational awareness can be done by use of visual displays using technology to show proximity of terrains. Also, flights that lack GPWS and TAWS can be fitted with a radio altimeter to create awareness of imminent terrain (Cox, 2010).
Conclusion
To sum up, there is need to increase the safety of aircraft landing and take-offs through quality training of flight crews, improved infrastructure, good work quality and regular analysis of flight situations. Additionally, it is important that flight conditions be improved by ensuring that aircrafts are fitted with up to standard and modern equipment and technology. Airports runways should be expanded to avoid congestions and unnecessary accidents.
References
Berman, B., & Dismukes, R. (2011). Designing a Better Error Trap. Mobility Forum, 20(3), 4-9.
Compart, A. (2011). FAA Implements ‘Interim Plan’ To Prevent Absent Controller Incidents. Aviation Daily, 383(58), 3.
Cox, B. (2010). Stamp Out CFIT. Plane and Pilot, 46(5), 18-19. Retrieved from Career and Technical Education.
Flottau, J. (2011). Loss Of Control Replaces CFIT As Most Common Accident Cause. Aviation Daily, 383(43), 5.
Gerzanics, M. (2010). Staying in control. Flight International, 178(5261), 60-63.
Palacios, R. et al. (2010). Neural network models to detect airplane near-collision situations. Transportation Planning and Technology, 33(3), 237.