Human Factors in Automation
What the domain tests
Automation questions probe mode awareness, flight mode annunciator (FMA) interpretation, complacency, skill degradation and human-centred design.
Core rules
- Automation ranges from simple autopilot modes to full flight-envelope protection. Higher levels can reduce workload but increase monitoring demand.
- The FMA is the primary source of mode awareness: armed, active and engaged modes. Check it after every change.
- Mode confusion arises when the crew's mental model differs from the aircraft's actual mode; automation surprise follows.
- Automation complacency means passive monitoring and reduced vigilance. Automation bias means accepting automated data over conflicting cues.
- Skill degradation affects manual flying, raw-data scanning and unusual-attitude recovery when automation is overused.
- Human-centred automation keeps the pilot informed and in authority and avoids hidden modes.
Worked example
On descent, the crew selects 3,000 ft, but the aircraft levels at 4,000 ft because ALT HOLD remained engaged after a mode change. The FMA shows ALT HOLD, not ALT*. The crew expected a descent; this is mode confusion. Reasoning: verify the FMA after every selection, cross-check altitude and thrust, and announce mode changes aloud.
Traps
Do not say automation always reduces workload. Do not confuse complacency with fatigue. Do not blame 'the computer' - design and monitoring are human factors. Do not ignore raw data during high automation.