Human Factors Case Study The Ailerons, Elevator, And The Rudder
HUMAN FACTORS CASE STUDY
The curriculum tends to focus on the airlines which are only 50% of our flying industry.
The topic is the Human Factors that contributed to the crash of a Gulfstream IV tail number N121JM on May 31st, 2014, and the subsequent impact on the rest of the industry, specifically the rest of the Gulfstream fleet.
Make it 500-700 words and please re-read your paper enough times to weed out the grammatical and syntax errors.
NOTE:
Please present your essay on a Microsoft Word Document using Standard APA formatting and cite any sources using the same APA standard formatting.
Please refer to the APA formatting as shown in the Owl Purdue Writing Lab.
https://owl(dot)english(dot)purdue(dot)edu/owl/resource/560/02/
WARNING:
Be sure to cite your references and remember:
Wikipedia is NOT an acceptable reference source!!! Do NOT use it as a reference in your writing!!! Points WILL be deducted.
Human Factors Case Study
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Human Factors Case Study
On May 31, 2014, a Gulfstream IV tail number N121JM crashed during a rejected takeoff after overrunning the end of runway 11 at Bedford-Hanscom Field, MA (BED). All the two pilots, one crewmember, and four passengers died in the accident. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) said that human factors were the main probable cause of the crash. During the start process of the engine, the crew members failed to disengage the gust lock system of the airplane (kathrynsreport.com, 2014). This system locks the ailerons, elevator, and the rudder when the aircraft is packed in order to prevent wind gust loads. Moreover, the pilots failed to conduct a flight control check before takeoff and this would have made them to know about the locked flight controls.
Analysis of data that is present on the quick access recorder of the airplane showed that the pilots failed to conduct a full flight control checks for 98% of 175 takeoffs that have been previously done in the plane. This is an indication that this was a habitual oversight on the part of the pilots, and not an anomaly. Evidence indicates that if the crew had managed to initiate a rejected takeoff when the first “lock is on” comment by PIC, or at least 11 seconds after the comment had been made, the crew would have managed to stop the aircraft on the paved surface (kathrynsreport.com, 2014). Nevertheless, the crew delayed for almost 10 seconds to apply the brakes, and they delayed by 4 seconds to reduce the power. This implies that it was not possible to initiate the rejected takeoff until the crash was unavoidable. Therefore, the aircraft could not be stopped on the runaway and it proceeded to the runaway safety area until it reached the grass.
The crash of the G...