Differential method for establishing a comparative danger of air traffic controllers errors in professional activity

Abstract

The advantage systems of air traffic controllers as operators of the “front line”, which are directly responsible for ensuring the appropriate level of flight safety, are considered as a component of their decision making, determines, on the one hand, the influence of the human factor on the choice they make, and on the other hand, makes this choice much easier. The use of paired comparisons and determination of part of the total comparative danger as a way of establishing the systems of benefits of professional air traffic controllers on the spectrum of the characteristic errors that they make in the process of professional activity are substantiated. For the first time, the total risk of a pair of errors is determined in an absolute and unique by quasi metric features 100-point scale, and their separate contribution to this danger covers the entire continuum of the scale. In contrast to the traditional practice, which regulates part of the total danger, it allowed for a more differentiated assessment of the comparative dangers of errors. Using the traditional and the proposed method, group systems of advantages of air traffic controllers on the studied range of errors, which are almost identical, are constructed: Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient is equal to the value. The Kendall concordance coefficient calculated for the group preference system constructed in the traditional way is equal to and statistically reliable, and therefore the corresponding preference system is consistent. The coefficient of concordance calculated for the group system of benefits based on the application of the proposed differential approach to the pairwise comparison of the dangers of errors is almost twice greater, equal to the value and statistically reliable at a high level of significance. This indicates both the consistency of the opinions of the subjects and the high efficiency of the proposed differential approach.