Research integrity in European reduced-crew rulemaking: large-scale pilot health self-reports

Abstract

In Europe, rulemaking on single pilot operations (SPO) and its transitional stage of extended minimum crew operations (eMCO) has fuelled pilot unions in activism opposing them worldwide. Two officially unnamed aircraft manufacturers approached the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) to assess their operational flight safety for certification. The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) successfully mitigated the developments by setting the flight safety imperative to demonstrating equivalence. As part of rulemaking, a questionnaire on retrospectively disclosing health reports and physiological need preferences involved thousands of pilots, while a response rate of only 30.08% ( n = 1,999) fully committed to being involved. A methodological and ethical critique identified several issues compromising the study’s integrity. This rulemaking project has reached appropriate conclusions that eMCO and SPO were unequal in safety to current flight operations, although their data from the questionnaire and flight simulations methodologically never allowed for interpretation with regards to risk and contemporary flight safety levels. However, the specific European organisational and industrial environment provided the requirements to ensure research quality and its integrity, but suffered from several shortcomings during business conduct across hierarchies. The consortium excelled in documentation of group dynamics and complete availability of reports enabling organisational psychology to take up investigations. The next time rulemaking is externally contracted, it should be justified on contemporary technology readiness levels with respect to interdisciplinary research, method, design, and development capabilities in the application domain, their standards, guidelines, and specialities.