Business | The computer in the cockpit

Humans struggle to cope when automation fails

The perils of the human-machine interface

ONE WAY to tell who made the aircraft you are boarding is to steal a glimpse of the cockpit. A traditional control yoke in front of the pilots suggests a Boeing; a joystick beside each seat, an Airbus. Pilots argue about which system is better; neither is considered safer than the other. Each exemplifies a different approach to a problem that manufacturers of not just aircraft but also cars, trains and ships must grapple with as long as human operators handle increasingly automated machines.

The challenge of what engineers call the “human-machine interface” has tragically gained attention after the crash of an Ethiopian Airlines Boeing 737 MAX 8 on March 10th. Eyewitnesses reported that shortly after departing Addis Ababa, the aircraft climbed and dived repeatedly. Similarities were drawn with a fatal crash in Indonesia in October last year. That time, the pilots of a Lion Air MAX 8 struggled, also soon after take-off, with an automated safety system that erroneously tried to prevent the aircraft from stalling by lowering its nose.

This article appeared in the Business section of the print edition under the headline "The computer in the cockpit"

Oh **UK! Whatever next?

From the March 16th 2019 edition

Discover stories from this section and more in the list of contents

Explore the edition

More from Business

Does Perplexity’s “answer engine” threaten Google?

Taking aim at one of the best business models of all times

How not to work on a plane

Hours without interruption and work to do. What could go wrong?


Why does BHP want Anglo American?

Its $39bn takeover offer is the latest in a string of mining mega-mergers