Abstract:Commercial aviation is currently one of the safest modes of transportation; however, human error is still one major contributing cause of aeronautical accidents and incidents. One promising avenue to further enhance flight safety is Neuroergonomics, an approach at the intersection of neuroscience, cognitive engineering and human factors, which aims to create better human-system interaction. Eye-tracking technology allows users to "monitor the monitoring" by providing insights into both pilots' attentional distribution and underlying decisional processes. In this position paper, we identify and define a framework of four stages of step-by-step integration of eye-tracking systems in modern cockpits. Stage I concerns Pilot Training and Flight Performance Analysis on-ground; stage II proposes On-board Gaze Recordings as extra data for the "black box" recorders; stage III describes Gaze-Based Flight Deck Adaptation including warning and alerting systems, and, eventually, stage IV prophesies Gaze-Based Aircraft Adaptation including authority taking by the aircraft. We illustrate the potential of these four steps with a description of incidents or accidents that we could certainly have avoided thanks to eye-tracking. Estimated milestones for the integration of each stage are also proposed together with a list of some implementation limitations. We believe that the research institutions and industrial actors of the domain will all benefit from the integration of the framework of the eye-tracking systems into cockpits.

Poor cockpit monitoring has been identified as an important contributor to aviation accidents. Improving pilots’ monitoring strategies could therefore help to enhance flight safety. During two different sessions, we analyzed the flight performance and eye movements of professional airline pilots in a full-flight simulator. In a pre-training session, 20 pilots performed a manual approach scenario as pilot flying (PFs) and were classified into three groups according to their flight performance: unstabilized, standard, and most accurate. The unstabilized pilots either under- or over-focused various instruments. Their number of visual scanning patterns was lower than those of pilots who managed to stabilize their approach. The most accurate pilots showed a higher perceptual efficiency with shorter fixation times and more fixations on important primary flight instruments. Approximately 10 months later, fourteen pilots returned for a post-training session. They received a short training program and performed a similar manual approach as during the pre-training session. Seven of them, the experimental group, received individual feedback on their own performance and visual behavior (i.e., during the pre-training session) and a variety of data obtained from the most accurate pilots, including an eye-tracking video showing efficient visual scanning strategies from one of the most accurate pilots. The other seven, the control group, received general guidelines on cockpit monitoring. During the post-training session, the experimental group had better flight performance (compared to the control group), and its visual scanning strategies became more similar to those of the most accurate pilots. In summary, our results suggest that cockpit monitoring underlies manual flight performance and that it can be improved using a training program based mainly on exposure to eye movement examples from highly accurate pilots.

No abstract