Objective

We tested whether a procedure in a hexapod simulator can cause incorrect assumptions of the bank angle (i.e., the “leans”) in airline pilots as well as incorrect interpretations of the attitude indicator (AI).

Background

The effect of the leans on interpretation errors has previously been demonstrated in nonpilots. In-flight, incorrect assumptions can arise due to misleading roll cues (spatial disorientation).

Method

Pilots (n = 18) performed 36 runs, in which they were asked to roll to wings level using only the AI. They received roll cues before the AI was shown, which matched with the AI bank angle direction in most runs, but which were toward the opposite direction in a leans-opposite condition (four runs). In a baseline condition (four runs), they received no roll cues. To test whether pilots responded to the AI, the AI sometimes showed wings level following roll cues in a leans-level condition (four runs).

Results

Overall, pilots made significantly more errors in the leans-opposite (19.4%) compared to the baseline (6.9%) or leans-level condition (0.0%). There was a pronounced learning effect in the leans-opposite condition, as 38.9% of pilots made an error in the first exposure to this condition. Experience (i.e., flight hours) had no significant effects.

Conclusion

The leans procedure was effective in inducing AI misinterpretations and control input errors in pilots.

Application

The procedure can be used in spatial disorientation demonstrations. The results underline the importance of unambiguous displays that should be able to quickly correct incorrect assumptions due to spatial disorientation.

中文翻译：

---

六足动物模拟器中的倾斜错觉助长了航空公司飞行员对人工地平线的错误反应

客观的

我们测试了六足模拟器中的程序是否会导致航空公司飞行员对坡度角（即“倾斜”）的错误假设以及对姿态指示器（AI）的错误解释。

背景

先前已在非飞行员身上证明了倾斜对解释错误的影响。在飞行中，由于误导性的滚动提示（空间迷失方向），可能会出现不正确的假设。

方法

飞行员 ( n = 18) 进行了 36 次运行，其中要求他们仅使用 AI 滚动到机翼水平。他们在 AI 显示之前收到滚动提示，这在大多数运行中与 AI 坡度方向匹配，但在倾斜相反的条件下（四次运行）朝向相反的方向。在基线条件（四次运行）中，他们没有收到滚动提示。为了测试飞行员是否对 AI 做出反应，AI 有时会在倾斜水平条件下（四次运行）根据滚动提示显示机翼水平。

结果

总体而言，与基线 (6.9%) 或倾斜水平条件 (0.0%) 相比，飞行员在反向倾斜 (19.4%) 中犯的错误明显更多。在反向倾斜条件下有明显的学习效果，因为 38.9% 的飞行员在第一次接触这种条件时犯了错误。经验（即飞行小时数）没有显着影响。

结论

精益程序有效地诱导了飞行员的人工智能误解和控制输入错误。

应用

该程序可用于空间迷失方向演示。结果强调了明确显示的重要性，该显示应该能够快速纠正由于空间迷失方向导致的错误假设。