Member
/Initials in Minutes
/Attendance
12 June 2003:Total 11
Ms Rosanne Beal / Ms RB / Apologies
Capt Roger Benison / RB / Apologies
Mr Mark Brunt / MB / Apologies
Capt Jeremy Butler / JB / Apologies
Capt Paddy Carver / PC /
Capt Graham Cruse
(Deputy Chairman) / GC / Apologies
Lt Cdr Ian Daniels RN / ID /
Mrs Jo Davies / JD /
Ms Hannah Dowson / HD / Apologies
Mr Carey Edwards / CE / (from Item 8.2)
Mr Cliff Edwards / CJE / Apologies
Dr Paul Emmerson / PE / Apologies
Capt Paul Field / PF / Apologies
Capt Pete Griffiths / PG / Apologies
Capt David Harrison / DH /
Dr Tony Head / TH / Apologies
Mr Pieter Hemsley (Chairman) / PH /
Mr Rick Heybroek (Treasurer) / RH / Apologies
Capt Steve Hunt / SH / Apologies
Ms Heather McIntyre / HMc / Apologies
Ms Fiona Merritt (Secretary) / FM /
Wg Cdr Barry Neal RAF Retd / BN / Apologies
Dr Ian Perry / IP / Apologies
Capt David Robinson / DR /
Mr Alan Simmons / ASi /
Dr Philip Smith / PS / Apologies
Dr Anthony Smoker / ASm /
Capt Mike Stonehewer / MS / Apologies
Ms Nicole Svatek / NS /
Mr Arthur Thorning / AT / Apologies
Dr Peter Waugh / PW / Apologies
Miss Nyree Jordan
(Staff Member) / NJ / (Item 8.6 only)
Human Factors Group Committee
Royal Aeronautical Society
Human Factors Group
Minutes of the Committee Meeting
held at RAeS, 4 Hamilton Place, London
on Thursday 12 June 2003
/ Actions /ITEM 1. Chairman's opening Remarks
The Chairman welcomed Jo Davies, from ESE Associates, to the Committee, and confirmed Lt Cdr Ian Daniels (DASC) welcome as a full Committee member.
As with the previous meeting, a relatively low attendance was noted, probably due to the fact that the CRMAP meeting is being held on a different day. The Chairman will liaise with the CRMAP Chairman and the CAA to try to arrange future HFG and CRMAP meetings on the same day. / PH
ITEM 2. Apologies for absence
See Page 1.
ITEM 3. Minutes of the previous meeting on 13th March 2003
The minutes were accepted without comment
ITEM 4. Matters arising
Most of the matters arising are covered under specific agenda items. Those which are not are mentioned here.
Liaison with the Dutch HUFAG - the invitation still stands for one or more RAeS Committee members to attend one of the HUFAG meetings, and vice-versa.
The Swissair accident was discussed at the last meeting. There has been no report from the FSF as yet.
ITEM 5. Membership criteria
During email exchanges prior to the meeting, RH had aired the apparent contradiction between the Constitution and 'slot' membership, which ought to be resolved. PH said that the case for MoD holding a ‘slot’ was an historic anomaly that could no longer be justified as it is at odds with the Constitution. That said, it had not caused any practical difficulties during the lifetime of the committee. He said the pragmatic solution was to afford MoD DASC the same status as all others. He emphasised that it was understood that Committee members speak for themselves and not for the organisations to which they might belong. It was agreed that the protocols (not the constitution) may need to be changed. GC and PH will look at what changes are necessary. / PH, GC
'Chatham House' rules mean that anyone within the meeting can say what they like with the assurance of a certain degree of confidentiality. Individuals will not be named in the minutes in connection with potentially sensitive statements.
Ian Daniels (ID) and Jo Davies (JD) were voted in as members of the HFG committee, subject to the usual 12 months’ probationary period. Chairman’s Afternote: It was appropriate that for ID this period would start from his first meeting on 13 March.
RH had put forward a proposal, by email, to have a more interactive consultation with HF members and supporters. In particular, the HFG should be canvassing opinion from the industry as to what issues are of prime importance and on the HFG's agenda. For example, the HFG ought to be ascertaining whether the conferences run are meeting the needs of the industry, or whether there are other topics not being addressed. Another example is whether the location of the conferences (in London or the South of England) is always convenient for the industry. It was also suggested that we ought to be looking at a wider 'audience' than just UK.
RH's proposal to have better two-way interaction was welcomed, and DR volunteered to assist RH with this task. / DR
ITEM 6. Succession Planning
PH will be stepping down as Chairman from December 2003, and GC will be stepping down as deputy Chairman from June 2004; therefore volunteers are sought for these two posts. Nominations for both positions will be put to the vote at September's meeting. There are two options in terms of succession: (i) a new Chairman to take over directly from PH in December with GC to reamin as Deputy for a further 6 months to ensure continuity, or (ii) GC as temporary Chairman for 6 months after December, with a new Chairman after June 2004 and a new Deputy from December 2003.
There is no formal post description. There is a minimum commitment to the HFG and LSB but, being voluntary, the post is very much what you wish to make of it.
PH will send out an e-group message asking for volunteers for Chairman and Deputy. / PH
ITEM 7. CRM award
There have been only 8 votes in total, nominees being John Thompson, Graham Dainty and Rick Heybroek. Rick has asked not to be included as a candidate due to the fact that he was instrumental in proposing the award in the first place. As the other two nominees have equal votes, it has been proposed to give an award to both of the nominees (Ashgate have kindly agreed to this). PH has notified both of the award winners, and invited them to the October 15th conference, where the awards will be given by John Hindley of Ashgate.
It was generally agreed that we need to advertise the existence of the award more widely in future in order to attract more nominations for the 2003 award. The closing date for nominations is 1 December 2003. One of the problems with the original voting criteria was that the very people who are likely to wish to nominate people for the award are those on the HFG and CRMAP who were not (originally) eligible to vote. However, everyone will be eligible to vote this year, so it is hoped that there will be a greater number of nominations and votes than last year.
There was some discussion concerning the frequency, scope and title of the award, several committee members not having been aware that the award remit was wider than just CRM. It was agreed that the title of the award, "CRM and HF Practice Award", tends to give the immediate impression that the award is primarily for CRM practitioners in flight operations, since other areas of the industry tend not to use the term "CRM", despite the remit actually being wider than CRM. One suggestion was to focus the award on a particular area of the aviation industry each year (eg, flight operations CRM one year, maintenance human factors another year, ATC HF another year, etc), and to publicise it accordingly. PH agreed to discuss this with RH. / PH
ITEM 8. Standing Group Reports
8.1 ATC (Asm)
ASm and one of the original members of the ATC SG have discussed how the group should function, and determined that email discussions among the ATC SG members would be the main working method. ASm will take the opportunity as a speaker at the October 15th conference to advertise the work of the ATC SG.
Two of the topical issues include:
· Automation - changes in ATM with increasing automation
· Hazard analysis for Swanwick upgrade in 2007
ASm gave an update on the Geneva midair accident, especially feedback on a presentation to IFATCA by the Swiss ATCO who had taken over immediately after the accident had occurred, in particular concerning the post incident/accident issues. This provoked a discussion about how various parts of the aviation industry, the press, particular Countries or Companies treat the individuals concerned in incidents and accidents, and how suspension of individuals post incident is regarded – ie, as a necessary protective measure or as punishment. The concept of "just culture" versus "blame culture/scapegoat culture" was suggested as a possible future conference topic.
8.2 CRM SG (CE)
The CRM SG recently met, topics under discussion having included:
· Assessment of individuals
· CRMI/CRMIE standardisation - are some people slipping through the net?
· CRM implications of the locked cockpit door
· CRM recruitment and training
· The production of a video on CRM
8.3 EMSG (FM)
The EMSG met on 10 June and subjects under discussion included:
· The recent MEMS/MEDA conference and data sharing project
· A forthcoming meeting of MHF trainers and lessons to be learned from CRM
· The proposal for an MHF mini-conference at Woodford to attract delegates from the North and Midlands
There was a brief discussion concerning Licensed Engineers and whether or not they have to be 're-validated'. ASi explained that they are awarded a license without type by the CAA (or other National Authority) and are then given a company approval to work on certain types of aircraft, which is subject to various criteria for renewal. CE queried whether this needed to be revisited.
8.4 Research (JD)
JD has spoken with Sue Jensen and suggests that SJ's proposed ToR for the Research SG might be a little ambitious at the present time. JD proposes the following remit instead:
· Establish an active presence on the RAeS HFG website
· Establish links with other appropriate organisations and committees, especially those which already have websites
· Identify work already published in particular areas (eg, SA) for people wishing to know where to start
· Civil and military
· Eliciting input from a wide range of people, by means of email exchange (eg, Paul Emmerson, Peter Wilkinson, Helen Dudfield, Hazel Courteney, Gretchen Burrett, etc)
Additional suggestions from committee members included:
· Identifying gaps in research
· NS proposed the A380 as a suitable candidate for consideration, especially the need to identify minimum requirements for crew rest facilities (these will not be in the certification criteria; they are a company specified option) and roles of handling pilots and non-handling pilots.
All committee members were invited to put forward suggestions to JD concerning topics which the RSG might address, and contact details of people who might be willing to assist. DR offered to provide details of individuals who might be interested in contributing, in particular contacts in Airbus and Boeing. / All
JD suggested that each SG might like to prepare a paper highlighting the research needs of its particular area of aviation. / All SG Chairs
ASm suggested that one role of the Research SG might be to liaise with Universities and give students ideas for projects. This could be done by holding a meeting with a few mini presentations, to which students and university lecturers would be invited.
8.5 Training Evaluation SG (PH for PS)
Feedback from PS suggests that there currently is not the funding or willingness among companies to volunteer to work on this project.
PC advised that ATQP has been proposed which will require validation, moving away from operator proficiency checks, and allowing training for a company's specific needs. A JAROPS proposal is due out this Autumn.
8.6 Conference Planning and Publicity
8.6.1 - Helicopter technology conference
The May 2003 conference was postponed because only 23 people had signed up, despite the generous DTi sponsorship in order to keep the price down. The new date is 4 February 2004. Possible reasons for the low registration were:
· late flyer
· budget constraints (industry)
· availability (of attendees for that date)
· lack of test marketing (to see if this was what industry wanted to hear about)
· ticket price still high (despite sponsorship)
· front title and photo may have led people to believe it was a military conference
8.6.2 Oct 15th conference "Mitigating Human Error"
The programme has been finalised and looks good (see flyer sent on egroup). Virgin Atlantic will provide the transatlantic air ticket for Dan Maurino, so the CRM fund will only need to cover additional internal travel costs of one speaker (including overnight accommodation at the RAF Club). PH had tried to get sponsorship but as yet to no avail.
Cost for attendance is £41 to £99, depending on membership criteria, with no charge for full committee members. 80 delegates are needed to break even.
PH has been publicising the event by emailing contacts, and encouraging all committee members to do the same, and by other means such as writing an article. Over 70 people have replied to PH's initial emails to express interest in attending. The conference has been advertised in 4 journals: the Ergonomics Society, Cranfield, Aerospace and Flight Safety Focus. ASm also suggested the Journal of Aviation Psychology, and NS suggested the CAT journal (Aviation training).
This is a Category C conference therefore papers can go on the website.
For future reference, NJ mentioned that the RAeS conference office could only consider funding a speaker's travel costs (i) if it was a Cat A conference and (ii) if it was budgeted enough in advance.