Human factors considerations for critical maintenance tasks and their effect on the transition to digital documentation: an exploratory expert survey
Abstract
Digitised maintenance documentation will soon be the norm in aviation. Failure to correctly perform maintenance tasks may lead to aviation safety hazardous events. This article explores the views of aviation maintenance subject matter experts on errors affecting critical maintenance tasks and how views can inform transition to digitised documentation. This exploratory study offers a fresh view on human factors’ implications around critical maintenance tasks and their relation to digital documentation. A cross-sectional design method was utilised. Anonymous responses were collected with a mixed-methods questionnaire from convenience sample of participants from different aircraft maintenance and continuing airworthiness management organisations. Expert opinions of 25 aircraft maintenance and technical services engineers were recorded. All participants had personal experience with maintenance errors, where human factors attributed to these errors. They highlighted the lack of human factors’ awareness and the need to strengthen their contributory role in critical maintenance tasks. Participants’ views appeared divided in terms of challenges associated with digital documentation utilisation. Positive features emerged, such as critical maintenance tasks or duplicate/independent inspections’ highlighting, notes and warnings’ higher visibility, up-to-date documentation availability and better connectivity among activities. Negative themes concentrated on the tactile nature of paper and on the additional technology knowledge requirements.
Keyword : aircraft maintenance, human error, human factors, critical maintenance tasks, digitisation, aviation maintenance documentation
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Aust, J., & Pons, D. (2022). Assessment of aircraft engine blade inspection performance using attribute agreement analysis. Safety, 8(2), Article 23. https://doi.org/10.3390/safety8020023
Bao, M., & Ding, S. (2014). Individual-related factors and management-related factors in aviation maintenance. Procedia Engineering, 80, 293–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2014.09.088
Blaise, J.-C., Levrat, E., & Iung, B. (2014). Process approach-based methodology for safe maintenance operation: From concepts to SPRIMI software prototype. Safety Science, 70, 99–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2014.05.008
Chang, Y.-H., & Wang, Y.-C. (2010). Significant human risk factors in aircraft maintenance technicians. Safety Science, 48(1), 54–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2009.05.004
Chatzi, A. (2019). The role of communication in aviation maintenance and its relation to trust [PhD Thesis, University of Southern Queensland]. https://research.usq.edu.au/item/q5xwv/the-role-of-communication-in-aviation-maintenance-and-its-relation-to-trust
Chatzi, A. V., Bates, P. R., & Martin, W. L. (2020). Exploring the association between communication satisfaction and trust in the aviation maintenance environment: An international study. The International Journal of Aerospace Psychology, 30(3–4), 190–214. https://doi.org/10.1080/24721840.2020.1801347
Dupont, G. (1997). The dirty dozen errors in maintenance. In 11th Symposium on Human Factors in Maintenance and Inspection: Human Error in Aviation Maintenance. Washington, DC, USA.
Elakramine, F., Jaradat, R., Hossain, N. U. I., Banghart, M., Kerr, C., & El Amrani, S. (2021). Applying systems modeling language in an aviation maintenance system. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 69(6), 4006–4018. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2021.3089438
European Aviation Safety Agency. (2023a). European Plan for Aviation Safety (EPAS) Volume II EPAS actions (European Plan for Aviation Safety (EPAS). EASA.
European Aviation Safety Agency. (2023b). Guidelines on the use of electronic documents, records, and signatures. EASA.
European Union. (2014). Commission Regulation (EU) No 1321/2014 of 26 November 2014 on the continuing airworthiness of aircraft and aeronautical products, parts and appliances, and on the approval of organisations and personnel involved in these tasks (L 362/361 - L362/194).
Federal Aviation Administration. (2018). Aviation handbooks & manuals. https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation
Flin, R., O’Connor, P., & Mearns, K. (2002). Crew resource management: Improving team work in high reliability industries. Team Performance Management, 8(3/4), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1108/13527590210433366
Kwakye, A. D., Jennions, I. K., & Ezhilarasu, C. M. (2024). Platform health management for aircraft maintenance – a review. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 238(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/09544100231219736
Leedy, P. D., & Ormrod, J. E. (2020). Practical research: Planning and design (12th ed.). Pearson Education.
Marais, K. B., & Robichaud, M. R. (2012). Analysis of trends in aviation maintenance risk: An empirical approach. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 106, 104–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2012.06.003
Marquardt, N., Gades, R., & Robelski, S. (2012). Implicit social cognition and safety culture. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 22(3), 213–234. https://doi.org/10.1002/hfm.20264
Paris, F., Casanova, R., Bergeonneau, M.-L., & Mestre, D. (2024). Differences between Experts and novices in the use of aircraft maintenance documentation: Evidence from eye tracking. Applied Sciences, 14(3), Article 1251. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14031251
Reiman, T. (2011). Understanding maintenance work in safety-critical organisations–managing the performance variability. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 12(4), 339–366. https://doi.org/10.1080/14639221003725449
Wise, J. A., Hopkin, V. D., & Garland, D. J. (2016). Handbook of aviation human factors. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/b10401
Zimmermann, N., & Mendonca, F. A. C. (2021). The impact of human factors and maintenance documentation on aviation safety: An analysis of 15 years of accident data through the PEAR framework. The Collegiate Aviation Review International, 39(2), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.22488/okstate.22.100230