Provide a classmate review on their discussion topic :
present a synopsis of one of the research articles that you found in your assignment this module week. Be sure that your summary includes:
- the problem
- the quantitative strategy of inquiry
- data collection and analysis plan
Finally, discuss any issues that you found in the logic of the research article (e.g., inconsistent or unclear narrative, disconnect in methodology, and data collection plan). Under your video post, include an APA-formatted reference of the article.
Classmate post that you need to post comment/ review on:
The problem is â€œGeneral Aviation (GA) pilots flying into instrument meteorological conditions (IMCs) whilst operating under visual flight rules (VFRs) and being restrained to visual meteorological conditions (VMCs) remains a leading and continuing cause of accidents. According to the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, this is â€œone of the most consistently lethal mistakes in all of aviationâ€ with 86% of occurrences resulting in fatalities. The United States National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) estimates that of the GA accidents that occur in IMCs, two-thirds will be fatal. This is far higher than the overall rate for GA accidents, including fatalities from mid-air collisions, wire strikes, or pilot incapacitationâ€ (Ayiei et al., 2020, p. 2).
The overarching research questions that precede the hypotheses presented in this article are:
1. How do weather, aircraft, pilot, and operational factors contribute to Australian VFR2IMC occurrences?
2. How do the distributions of contributing factors in Australian VFR2IMC occurrences differ to those expected?
There are three key hypotheses presented in this study as follows:
(1) that pilot experience should reduce the likelihood of experiencing VFR2IMC,
(2) student pilots involved in solo training exercises are more likely to encounter VFR2IMC,
(3) the type of GA aircraft should have no influence on the likelihood of experiencing VFR2IMC.
The chi-squared tests for goodness of fit were expressed as follows:
â€œThe null hypothesis (H0) can therefore be expressed as â€œthe proportions of VFR2IMC safety occurrences are equal to the proportions expected, for the different categoriesâ€. Conversely, the alternative hypothesis (HA) is that â€˜the proportions are not equalâ€™â€ (Ayiei et al., 2020, p. 7).
The Quantitative Strategy of Inquiry
The quantitative strategy of inquiry is an ex post facto (or after the fact) quantitative analysis. The ex post facto analysis utilizes data that has already happened and has been assembled into a database (such as the case here with data gathered by the NTSB, the Nall Report, and the ATSB). Therefore, the researcher does not have any influence over the data used in their study. Salkind (2010) notes that ex post facto research designs are usually used to test hypotheses about cause-and-effect relationships or in situations, which do not allow, are not ethically acceptable, or are impractical for the use of a true experimental design. This study relied on data that has already happened naturally without the authors interfering with or manipulating any of the independent variables. The independent variable is the occurrence of pilots flying into instrument meteorological conditions whilst operating under visual flight rules and being restrained to VFR.
Data Collection and Analysis Plan
The researchers used the Australian Transport Safety Bureau database from 2003 through 2019 to gather occurrences of VFR to IMC. There were a total of 196 such occurrences, from which 26 of those had formal reports. These 26 reports were further used by the researchers to conduct a qualitative study that applied the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System framework to isolate the human factors found to be most prevalent.
The researchers state that they based their quantitative research on a previous work that investigated remotely piloted aircraft. The data was analyzed using Pearsonâ€™s chi-squared tests for goodness of fit. Data was collected from the Australian Transport Safety Bureau, the Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport, and Regional Economics, and the Bureau of Meteorology.
The quantitative study analyzed the 196 recorded safety occurrences to explain the findings from the qualitative portion of the study and to determine whether there was a relationship between each of the six categorical factors that were investigated and the safety occurrences. The six categorical factors were occurrence type, fatal or nonfatal, type of operation, aircraft manufacturer, airspace classification, and year/month of occurrence.
The researchers provided a table with the outputs from the Pearsonâ€™s chi-squared test for goodness of fit for each of the categorical factors. They state that â€œAll six of the tests were positive, that is, the null hypothesis was rejected for each, and the proportions observed for each of the factors were different to the proportions expectedâ€ (Ayiei et al., 2020, p. 13).
The researchers also found that pilot experience did not positively influence the safety occurrences – visual to instrument. Specifically, pilots with more hours were recorded to have had more safety occurrences than pilots with fewer hours. In addition, â€œonly private operations showed values greater than expected, indicating that VFR2IMC is a greater concern for private operations and is associated with poor planning and preflight preparationâ€ (Ayiei et al., 2020, p. 20). Lastly, the third hypothesis was also rejected as the study showed that the type of aircraft did have a significance in the safety occurrences. The researchers do note that this particular category might be influenced by the popularity of the two aircraft types that were found to be most prevalent in the recorded occurrences. The authors state that â€œIn private operations, the common status of Cessna and Piper aircraft mean they are far more likely to be involved in private operationsâ€ (Ayiei et al., 2020, p. 21).
The researchers concluded that in terms of both the type of occurrence and the fatalness of these occurrences there were similar trends to all previous studies that state if VFR2IMC occurs, then it is disproportionately more likely to result in an accident and to end fatally. In addition, private aviation activities were more likely to be involved in VFR2IMC occurrences. The researchers also found that the type of rating pilots had was associated with fatalness. Specifically, pilots who had a night VFR were associated with an increased likelihood of a fatal occurrence. The same applied to pilots without night VFR or an instrument rating. the most interesting finding according to the authors was the relationship between the higher number of hours pilots had and the increased likelihood of these pilots flying into VFR2IMC. Preflight planning was found to be significant in the outcomes of fatalness or not. To sum it all, â€œthe primary combination of factors likely to result in a fatal VFR2IMC occurrence are encountering cloud with rain, having undertaken no correct and thorough preflight weather assessment, for a flight over elevated rough terrain with trees, then not immediately turning around (and potentially climbing), and not making a mayday call to support this actionâ€ (Ayiei et al., 2020, p. 22).
The researchers note that although education efforts and training have improved greatly in the last decade or so, the number of recorded VFR2IMC is still quite high suggesting that more should be done to curtail the occurrence of this event. The researchers state that pilots should always conduct a detailed review of weather from reliable meteorological sources as well as a continuous monitoring of the weather throughout the duration of their flight. If pilots should encounter deteriorating weather conditions, they should always turn back. If pilots find themselves in IMC, they should always seek help by making a mayday radio call. Lastly, the researchers also recommend that more safety related reports should be published and made available for pilots to read to promote safety awareness and continuous education and training.
Finally, discuss any issues that you found in the logic of the research article (e.g., inconsistent or unclear narrative, disconnect in methodology, and data collection plan).
I did not find any issues with the article. It was a little long, but it was quite detailed and incorporated a qualitative and quantitative analysis of data, which contributed to the accuracy, reliability, and validity of the information presented in it. The literature review was a sufficient and relevant.