A Design and Training Agenda for the Next Generation of Commercial Aircraft Flight Deck

  • Don Harris
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5639)


To maximize cost efficiencies the design of the modern commercial airliner flight deck must change quite radically. However, these efficiencies cannot be realized unless there are concomitant changes in the rest of the system, and in particular, the training aspect. This paper proposes a radical design agenda for the flight deck and outlines how efficiencies can be gained through a careful re-alignment and re-appraisal of the training requirements to operate this aircraft.


Flight Deck Design Human Factors Integration Training 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Harris, D.: Human Factors Integration in Defence. Cognition, Technology & Work 10, 169–172 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dekker, S.W.A.: On the other side of promise: what should we automate today? In: Harris, D. (ed.) Human Factors for Flight Deck Design, pp. 183–198. Ashgate, Aldershot (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Johnson, W.W., Battiste, V., Holland, S.: A cockpit display designed to enable limited flight deck separation responsibility. In: Proceedings of the 1999 SAE/AIAA World Aviation Congress. Society of Automotive Engineers/American Institute for Aeronautics and Astronautics, Astronautics, Anaheim, CA (1999)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Johnson, N.H., Canton, R., Battiste, V., Johnson, W.: Distributed air/ground traffic management enroute free maneuvering rules of the road: requirements and implementation for a simulation of en-route self separation. In: Proceedings of 2005 International Symposium on Aviation Psychology, Oklahoma City, OK. Ohio State University Press, Columbus (2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Harris, D.: A human-centred design agenda for the development of a single crew operated commercial aircraft. Aircraft Engineering & Aerospace Technology 79, 518–526 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rignér, J., Dekker, S.W.A.: Modern flight training: managing automation or learning to fly? In: Dekker, S.W.A., Hollnagel, E. (eds.) Coping with computers in the cockpit, pp. 145–151. Ashgate, Aldershot (1999)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Casner, S.M.: Learning about cockpit automation: From Piston trainer to jet transport. NASA report NASA/TM-2003-212260. NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field CA (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wood, S.J., Huddlestone, J.A.: Requirements for a revised syllabus to train pilots in the use of advanced flight deck automation. Human Factors & Aerospace Safety 6, 359–370 (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Thomas, M.J.W.: Improving organisational safety through the integrated evaluation of operational and training performance: an adaptation of the line operations safety audit (LOSA) methodology. Human Factors & Aerospace Safety 3, 25–46 (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Don Harris
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Systems Engineering and Human Factors, School of EngineeringCranfield UniversityCranfield, BedfordUK

Personalised recommendations