1. Trade-off between capacity and safety
Lisbon – 14 October 2016
Trade-off between capacity and safety
Paul Neering
Liaison Officer EU

2. Is a trade-off between capacity and safety acceptable?
Systemic approach
IFATCA involvement

3. Is a trade-off between capacity and safety acceptable?
Pressure on the system – examples
The Human Dimension
Madrid Declaration – SES 5th Pillar:
Acknowledging the human factor as the overriding enabler of change
PRESSURE Political goals of SES: increase safety with a factor 10. Investments in particular on Training have been halted to fulfil RP1 and 2 requirements. Examples Belgium Iceland MUAC. For the outside world figures look OK until consequences on staffing become reality. Besides new system implementation requires more ATCO’s during transition! HUMAN is not to be seen as a separate part of the system. The human is a given who comes to work to do a good professional job. MADRID acknowledges the Human Factor as the enabler of change.

4. Systemic Approach Myths on Automation – White Paper Role of Human
Best practices of ground based tools are ahead of many of the current Research areas especially when it comes to ATM. Examples Geneva and MUAC. MYTHS Men does not learn from history. Automation surprises every time. HUMAN should not be considered alone. Human and machine collaborate together to achieve the operational functions.

5. Almost ready for publication:
Informal Group on Enhanced Automation in Future European ATM
Automation in the field of Air Traffic Management
A White Paper
2015
Almost ready for publication:
Guidance Material
Paper presented to SJU in May Guidance Material ready by October Hopefully 2 projects of SESAR2020 will be performed along the White Paper principles.

6. Systemic Approach Myths on Automation – White Paper
Automation and human do not work alone
‘levels of automation’ is a usable concept idea
Automation is a gadget
Automatic systems are automatic
Automation does not change the nature of the work
Full automation is desirable
Man does not learn from history. Automation surprises every time!
Role of Human
Best practices of ground based tools are ahead of many of the current Research areas especially when it comes to ATM. Examples Geneva and MUAC. MYTHS 1. Sometimes they do work alone but they cannot act self-sufficient 2. automation is not uni-dimensional, the real world deals with performance variability and needs operators to adapt 3. Not just a gadget, it changes the nature of work 4. this may be the wish of the control engineer but in practice it does not work like that. There are too many interdependencies 5. Yes, it can 6. In some cases this may be true, the automation may increase the human’s workload. Will there be room left for further challenges?

7. Is this an acceptable definition of a ‘System’?
“an interacting combination, at any level of complexity, of people, materials, tools, machines, software, facilities, and procedures designed to work together for some common purpose.”
(Chapanis, 1996, pg. 20)
It is drawn from Systems engineering. And it is quite acceptable - beginning with interacting combination

8. Systemic Approach
Or is it as simple as a blind man and his cane? Together they are a total functioning system.

9. www.atmmasterplan.eu Systemic Approach Role of Human
The European ATM Master Plan chapter 4.7 brings to the fore the relationship between technology and human, a relationship that has to improve.
Advise to read!

10. IFATCA involvement SESAR – I SESAR 2020 ?? European ATM Master Plan
ICB – Industry Consultation Board
EGHD – Expert Group on Human Dimension of SES
Eurocontrol fora, a.o.
EASC - European ATM Staff Representatives Conference
PC – Provisional Council
AAB – Agency Advisory board

11. Conclusions
As Safety is paramount, there can only be a one-way trade-off between capacity and safety
Bending the human element to its border will eventually boomerang to the system or worse
Professionals, i.e. ATCOs and ATSEPs, should be involved in system changes from the very beginning
Collaboration of professional staff, operational and management, should be standard in a Systemic Approach

12. ….for the current and the future system!
In the mean time…..
Enable tasks compatible with human capabilities and limitations, taking consideration of foreseen working processes, working schedules and cultural evolutions
Limit the need for time critical reactions, the number and complexity of fall-back procedures
Limit the number of actions for coordination and communication between operators
Keep workload within acceptable limits
Appropriately mitigate the likelihood and/or consequences of human errors
Have an adequate level of situation awareness with regard to operators tasks
….for the current and the future system!

13. Obrigado pela sua atenção Thank you for your attention www.ifatca.org