What Would You Have Done? Learning From Others' Aviation Safety Events

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

What Would You Have Done?

Learning From Others’ Aviation Safety Events

Jolene Feldman, NASA Ames Research Center Sepehr Bastami, NASA Johnson Space Center Jon Holbrook, NASA Langley Research Center th International Symposium on Aviation Psychology (Virtual), May 27 - 30 , 2025

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Acknowledgments

NASA’s Human Contributions to Safety Team SWS / Airspace Operations Safety Program / Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate

Learning from Others’ Aviation Safety Events

Opportunities to engage with substantial and timely aviation safety resources currently exist through the Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS). Formulating ways to effectively utilize and build upon these resources for strengthening safety learning have been explored.

Background & Purpose

Learning literature & opportunities ➢ Cognitively active vs. passive learning (Stanger - Hall, 2012) ➢ Brain regions activated – observing ~ reading ( Speer et al., 2009) ➢ Maximize learning through engagement – construct simulations of situations Speer et al., 2009 Tasks ➢ To describe an approach to utilize ASRS newsletters and reports ➢ Leverage already available datasets – minimum resources ➢ Identify meaningful prompts to elicit engagement ➢ Expand on learning from others’ experiences https:// asrs.arc.nasa.gov and develop study stimuli

Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS)

➢ Database (Report to & Search) • Incident reporting from pilots, controllers, maintenance, cabin crew, and others • Voluntary, confidential (de - identified), non - punitive, independent • Currently >1.9m report narratives; est.

1976 (NASA / FAA) • Data fields & narrative section – “tell your story!” • In April 2021 - tailored forms for UAS/Drone Pilot, Visual Observer, & Crew ➢ Publications

ASRS Publications: Monthly safety newsletters

• Safety In Sight • CALLBACK (1st issue of WWYHD, June 2003) * What Would You Have Done (WWYHD)

ASRS “UAS Safety In Sight” WWYHD Example

Approach

➢ Database search by Reporter Organization • Filed by UAS remote pilots (n= 165) • April 2021 - September 2024 • Recreational operator reports (n=86), Commercial operator reports (n=79) ➢ Report features • Many reports descriptions of ignorance of the rules • Lack of knowledge about the system(s) • Too short, not enough information

Approach

➢ Report characterization criteria: Coding Factors Was there at least one decision point in the narrative for which there was some uncertainty about the outcome?

Did the narrative describe a situation that went beyond ignorance If “yes” to these

16 % of the

of either regulations or standard operating procedures (SOPs)?

identified as a reports met the WWYHD criteria for Did the narrative provide sufficient information/detail to ask, candidate!

“What would you have done”?

candidacy Did the narrative contain explicit discussion of goal trade offs?

Did the reporter describe what they were thinking?

Length of narrative in words (i.e., word count)

Analyses

➢ Report Length X Coding Factors (t - tests) • Significant differences for all factors except for a d escription of “a situation beyond ignorance of either regulations or SOPs” • Those coded as “Yes” for a WWYHD candidate were significantly longer than those coded as a “No” for a WWYHD candidate

Analyses

➢ Operator Type X Word Count was not

“I flew my new drone for the first time in the immediate vicinity of my house around XA:30 local

significantly different between time in order to practice learning how to fly it… I live

inside the Class Charlie airspace of SNA (I am about 4.5 miles from the airport)… I was una ware that I

Recreational and Commercial operator

needed LA ANC approval still even when flying below the airspace limitation shown. I inadvertently

reports

flew the drone around my house inside airspace, not realizing I needed LAANC authorization…” - Excerpt from ASRS Report Accession #2 135727 “The conditions supplied above (lost link and "return to

➢ Operator Type X Coding Factor – more

home") are what caused me to question the drone configuration . I occasionally fly automated missions in

reports filed by Recreational operators

controlled airspace with LAANC approval for an altitude of 50 feet. Autel Robotics EVO 2 drones do not allow pilots to set the "maximum altitude" or the emergency

than Commercial with “a situation that

"return to home" altitude to anything less than 82 feet, a value they established for some European countries.

went beyond ignorance of either

This has the potential to ca use safety issues in the NAS …”

regulations or SOPs”

- Excerpt from ASRS Report Accession #1 883509

Analyses

Distribution of WWYHD candidates by Word Count Median split of reports • For those below the 170 word count, 3.6% were candidates • For those above the 170 word count, 29.3% were candidates

Summary ➢ Learning from others’ experiences exist through ASRS narratives and constructive question prompts ➢ Developed method to code reports to identify WWYHD candidate reports ➢ Consider characteristics of narrative reports (e.g., coding criteria, narrative text length >170 words for “hits”) ➢ Using candidate set of reports, will explore other factors to learning • Specific types of questions asked • Response mediu m (self - generated, written, verbal) • Learning setting (individually, group)

Thank you!

Any questions, contact: Jolene.m.feldman@nasa.gov