Recent orders
Variable versus Constant Errors in Aviation
VARIABLE VERSUS CONSTANT ERRORS IN AVIATION
Name
Course
Tutor
Date
Variable versus Constant Errors in Aviation
It is difficult to ignore the concept of human errors. The two main human errors among the aircraft crews are variable and constant errors. Variable errors are random in the human environment whereas constant errors have a systematic pattern and are consistent. It is easy to detect constant errors hence easy to control whereas variable errors are difficult to predict making the difficult in handling. Recent developments in the field of aviation have led to a renewed interest in the elimination of variable and constant errors in daily operations of aircrafts. Management team in the aviation industry are creating awareness in understanding the nature of the task each employee has to perform in order to minimize human errors (Diehl, 2013). Employees in the aircraft industry should understand the environment they are working and the mechanisms in the performance of duties in order to give quality services. The nature of individuals working in the aircraft industry should have a sober mind and relaxed in order to minimize errors. The individuals in the aviation industry should have a mechanism of predicting the chances of occurrence of human error (Sarter & Alexander, 2000).
However, changes in the aviation industry have a serious effect in making corrections of variable and constant errors. Close examination of human errors is not bearing good results since the human being is working under the pressure of constant supervision. It is also difficult to predict the potentiality of conducting constant error since it does not permit a choice of accuracy. For example, a fatigued pilot has a high chance of making errors than an alert pilot. It is difficult to predict a fatigued pilot or even the pilot may deny that they are fatigued only to conduct errors during the flight operations (Diehl, 2013). Standard operating procedures (SOP) in performing tasks, in the aircraft industry should be clear and easy to understand. Ambiguous procedures have a high likelihood of causing errors during flights. Additional information on the standard operating procedures is helpful in operations as the information creates clarity on the operations. Operations within the aviation sectors have random errors that are not easy to predict and may have a large effect in the final procedures of operations (Shappell et al. 2007).
Recently, information on aviation errors offers contradictory findings of solving the human errors. It is difficult to completely solve human errors since procedures in the aviation industry have elements of random errors that are unavoidable. Human errors in the aircraft industry are inevitable. The management team in the aviation sector ensure that the errors do not have adverse effects that are fatal. Reduction of errors involves undergoing training to enhance competence in the aircraft operations and also controlling errors from causing an immediate effect (Byrne & Kirlik, 2005). Control of errors involves creating clear Standard Operating Procedures that addresses mitigation strategies. Some human errors are done by multi-crew panel in which it is difficult to detect the source of error. Aircraft sector requires human reliability in that the person in that the person emphatically admits the errors even before mitigation process. Early identification of errors results in solving the problem with ease. Human reliability and error performance is more of an art than science in that it is difficult to predict the perfect performance of an individual (Latorella & Prabhu, 2000).
Most studies in aviation have only been carried out in a small number of areas of human perfection in duty performance. Certain conditions attribute towards error performance and have not received considerable attentions towards mitigation studies. Human factors such as stress, fatigue, poor training, loud noise, and personal life problems have a major contribution towards variable and constant errors in aviation. Variable and constant errors also occur during training sessions. Constant errors produce damaging consequences that may have regrettable consequences. The constant errors are not avoidable but are manageable. Variable and constant errors fall under unintentional types of errors. Poor judgement, carelessness and insufficient knowledge may lead in variable errors. Unknowingly errors may get mistaken with intentional mistake making it difficult in conducting mitigation studies. Mitigating the risk involves the use of proper logbooks and worksheets that give clear communication on accomplishment of the tasks. Mitigation procedures ensure maintenance of personal thoughts and ideas towards completion of the task. Aircraft sector does not assume any completed work before conduction of mitigation risk (Byrne & Kirlik, 2005).
In conclusion, the aviation studies have a major concern on human factors that bring safety of the aircraft operations. Communication and coordination among the staff in the aviation academy will help in a reduction of constant and variable errors. Complacency gives the staff in the aviation sector a sense of confidence in the daily operations. Individuals should have self-satisfaction on the completion of a task. Repetitive tasks require well illustrated standard operating procedure in order to avoid constant errors (Sarter & Alexander, 2000). Some of the constant errors in aviation are due to ambiguous procedures that lead in false interpretation of the concept. Variable procedures are difficult to detect since they have intrinsic source. Major errors are due to personal motives cognitive process but not due to lack of maintenance proficiency. It is the role of the management team to provide a good working environment in the aircraft industry in order to minimize variable and constant errors (Chen, Chen & Lin, 2009).
References:
Byrne, M. D., & Kirlik, A. (2005). Using Computational Cognitive Modeling To Diagnose
Possible Sources Of Aviation Error. The international journal of aviation psychology, 15(2), 135-155. HYPERLINK http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1207/s15327108ijap1502_2http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1207/s15327108ijap1502_2#.U2NDFqLNnac
Chen, C. C., Chen, J., & Lin, P. C. (2009). Identification Of Significant Threats And Errors
Affecting Aviation Safety In Taiwan Using The Analytical Hierarchy Process. Journal of Air Transport Management, 15(5), 261-263. HYPERLINK “http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0969699709000027” http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0969699709000027
Diehl, A. (2013). “Air Safety Investigators: Using Science To Save Lives-One Crash At A Time”. Xlibris corporation. HYPERLINK “http://www.prweb.com/releases/DrAlanDiehl/AirSafetyInvestigators/prweb10735591.htm” http://www.prweb.com/releases/DrAlanDiehl/AirSafetyInvestigators/prweb10735591.htm
Latorella, K. A., & Prabhu, P. V. (2000). A Review Of Human Error In Aviation Maintenance
And Inspection. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 26(2), 133-161. HYPERLINK “http://www.jccjournal.org/article/S0883-9441%2803%2900108-4/fulltext” http://www.jccjournal.org/article/S0883-9441%2803%2900108-4/fulltext
Shappell, S., Detwiler, C., Holcomb, K., Hackworth, C., Boquet, A., & Wiegmann, D. A. (2007).
Human Error And Commercial Aviation Accidents: An Analysis Using The Human Factors Analysis And Classification System. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 49(2), 227-242. HYPERLINK “http://hfs.sagepub.com/content/49/2/227.full.pdf” http://hfs.sagepub.com/content/49/2/227.full.pdf
Sarter, N. B., & Alexander, H. M. (2000). Error Types And Related Error Detection Mechanisms
In The Aviation Domain: An Analysis Of Aviation Safety Reporting System Incident Reports. The international journal of aviation psychology, 10(2), 189-206. HYPERLINK http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1207/S15327108IJAP1002_5http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1207/S15327108IJAP1002_5#.U2NEZKLNnac
Vargo, Maglio, and Akaka (2008), best analyze the relationship between values of goods-dominant and service-dominant (SD) log
Introduction
Vargo, Maglio, and Akaka (2008), best analyze the relationship between values of goods-dominant and service-dominant (SD) logic. In the article entitled “On value and value co-creation: a service systems and service logic perspective,” the authors redefines the conventional outlook on service and value creation. Supposedly, the article endorses exchange of services as the main concern in modern markets and services (Vargo, Maglio, & Akaka, 2008, p. 146). Consequently, the article explores the virtues of Aristotle’s stand on exchange and use value differences. Indeed, the article is based on claims and comments made by other prominent economic scholars such as Adam smith. In these references, the authors concentrate on the domain of goods-dominant logic. This presence is intended to compare and contrast the two logics.
Theoretical foundationGoods-Dominant (GD) LogicThe theoretical foundation of the article deviates from other mainstream system thinking and ideas developments. This results from privileges of the goods-dominant logic as a key determinant of economic exchange as initially determined. Consequently, the author asserts that all kinds of exchange are based on service (Vargo, Maglio, & Akaka, 2008, p. 145). This is the main factor that differentiates the article’s argument from conventional thinking. Arguably, the convention of goods-based logic promotes a sense of dissonance between conventional accounting practices and the current economic hypothesis that stress more on the need to develop value-based systems and structures. Ideally, the author affirms the claim that all forms of dealings are eventually reducible to services to benefit the consumers.
The author investigates service science as a multidimensional variable. In this analysis, the author explores the connections between production and utility. In addition, the author explores the product and processing in the context of generation value. The article tracks how a product gains or losses value as it translate from one generation to another. Throughout the analysis, the study revolves on the difference between the goods-dominant logic and the service-dominant logic. The author hopes to connect the values of productivity and utilization (Vargo, Maglio, & Akaka, 2008, p. 147). The goods-dominant logic operates under a system that offers unique advantages to the end user. Technically, the concept assumes the existence of differentiated producers and consumers. In this assumption, both the consumer and the producer have needs, which are not related. In relation to this model, the consumer utilizes value while producers create such values. Thus, the value of a good or a service is realized at the point of consumption.
Service-Dominant (SD) LogicThe service-dominant model is based on the aspect of interdependence between consumers and producers. Presumably, the system is based on direct producer-consumer observations. It is sufficiently important that the relationship or transfer of value between producers and consumers have different forms of interpretation. Indeed, different interpretations depend on the corresponding discipline or field of study (Socci, 2005, p. 50). Apparently, the fundamentals of commerce are the underlying factors that streamline the aspect of utility and production. Thus, the different models translate to the fundamental principles of production and consumption as explained in consumer science and other related disciplines. Consequently, the article approaches the issue with the intentions of unearthing any underlying associations.
In the view of service-dominant value, value is considered to be characterized by the total effects of both the producers and consumers. An illustration of this is that, goods are valued after reaching a particular point in the process of consumption. Therefore, the consumers confer the element of value to goods when these prove to be effective in their use. At this point, it is clear that there is a relationship between the aspect of value and the process of consumption. Therefore, the aspect of value is best explained when consumption is put into consideration, since these two affect each other. The value of goods therefore, depends on how satisfactory they are to the consumer. This is the major differentiating factor between goods-dominant perspective and the service-dominant value perspective.
In the goods-dominant value, value is attached to the transfer of goods to the consumers from the producers. In this perspective, the more goods are transferred between producers and consumers, the higher the value. On the other hand, the service-dominant value draws from different views and approaches. In this case, to facilitate the transfer of goods between producers and consumers, the consumers must make their payments for the goods. This is meant to ensure the continuity of the value chain, so that consumers can come back and get more goods at a value.
Aristotelian Perspectives
In this article, focus is given to the various distinctions between use-value and exchange value, and how the differences between these two have evolved over the years. The philosophy of Aristotle has been used to debunk the use-value phenomenon. Aristotle utilized different relevant attribute to explain use value. Aristotle made sure to show the clear difference between different elements that form nature. He then went ahead to establish the different characteristics of those elements in nature, which made them dissimilar to each other. Therefore, with regard to use value, Aristotle believed that goods should be defined using their different characteristics, amounts, and how they relate. These characteristics of goods have to be the primary characteristics, which are perceived equally by different consumers.
In Aristotle’s perspective, an important factor, which contributes to the significance of use-value, is the fact that the aspects of knowing are not prioritized in this perspective, instead, the primacy of senses is given an upper hand. It thus, becomes clear that the adoption of this perception would not allow for the universal relevance of use-value, since some aspects of knowledge are specific to different people and communities. According to Socci (2005), it is also considerably challenging to determine the use-value of goods, since the determination of value in the context of the value concept is quite problematic. Since people perceive things in different ways, this would mean that, there would lack a universal approach of perceiving the concept of value. However, some thinkers have modified use value, to make it transcend beyond the aspect of senses.
Different types of aspects, which relate to use-value and exchange value, have been addressed in this article in an intensive manner. In addition, focus has been given on identifying the strengths and weaknesses of different thinker, who have addressed these issues. In order to determine the strengths and weaknesses of each thinker, the effectiveness of the issues were evaluated. Although the different factors relating to use-value have been described in relation to type of need, the obstacle that presents itself is that of failure to have a reliable standard of measure for needs, since needs are not quantifiable. In this case, therefore, it becomes clear that the element of need has to be ruled out as a determinant of the use-value or exchange value of goods.
It remains challenging to develop a reliable description of exchange value, since this lacks a reliable measure. Although some thinkers have suggested that money and need can be applicable in this case, others, such as Aristotle, were against this proposal, owing to the incapability of money and need to form a framework upon which other characteristics can relate. Therefore, this nature of exchange value makes it impossible for it to be applied to various change aspects. For exchange value to gain relevance and applicability there must be equilibrium between different aspects, which balance the consumers’ expectations of the goods and the nature of the goods, of which producers are responsible for their design and nature. This phenomenon takes us back to the role and importance of activities occurring between production and consumption of goods, which act as determinants of the value of goods.
Another important aspect of use-value of goods lies in its relationship with the elements of satisfaction and pleasure. Therefore, this shows that the concept of value is closely associated with pleasure and satisfaction, considering that these three influence one another in different ways. The author has noted that in the past, people derived pleasure from purchasing a new item, probably because this gave them a new ownership. Therefore, it is considered that the newly bought goods and services served the purpose of satisfying people’s pleasure. Therefore, Socci (2005) has argued that in this case, pleasure is bought in form of goods. Thus, this proves a relationship between value, pleasure, and satisfaction, since consumers will purchase goods and services, after evaluating the amount of pleasure the good or service will offer them. Hence, pleasure in this case, is somehow equated with value of the good or service.
Adam Smith’s Economic Science
Adam Smith is responsible for the new concepts of value-in-use and value-in-exchange. Smith’s argument was based on the difference between the level of value between goods in value-in-use and value-in-exchange. He argued that those goods with the highest value-in-use had the lowest value-in-exchange, while those goods with highest value-in-exchange, had the lowest value-in-use. Therefore, according to Smith, the value concepts of value-i-use and value-in-exchange were inversely proportional.
Adam Smith also made an important contribution with regard to the relationship between labour and exchange. Smith argued that most aspects of labour were deliberately conducted in order to gain and actualize the outcome of increased pleasure. In addition, since the outcome of pleasure was the motivation behind various aspects of labour, Smith believed that the aspect of pleasure, therefore, had a close relationship with those labour aspects, which actualized the labour process.
Vaping and Tobacco Cigarettes
Name
Instructor
Course
Date
Vaping and Tobacco Cigarettes
In the recent past, Electronic cigarettes gave become popular among all age groups. Primarily, e-cigarettes are battery-powered devices filled with liquid nicotine dissolved in water and propylene glycol. Most of them look like the conventional cigarette with a white cylindrical tube, brown filter and a red shining tip, but they do not contain tobacco. The use of these electronic cigarettes is known as vaping because when one inhales, the battery heats up the nicotine that creates a vapor that is inhaled into the lungs. As such, this essay discusses my support for vaping as a substitute for the conventional cigarettes.
Primarily, electronic cigarettes are much healthier than the regular cigarettes because they do not contain tobacco. Toxins emitted from the burning of tobacco are a major cause of illnesses and death linked with the use of nicotine. Thus, this means that e-cigarettes are a much safer way of inhaling nicotine. Researchers have suggested that for every million smokers who switch to e-cigarettes, there is a reduction of about 6000 premature deaths each year. Additionally, research has shown that the toxin concentration in e-cigarettes is below 5% of the contents of the conventional cigarettes. Moreover, second-hand inhalation of the e-cigarettes vapor is considered than in the second-hand inhalation of smoke from the regular cigarettes.
Aside from the risks associated with tobacco tar, e-cigarettes are much cheaper. The average daily smoker can spend up to 180 dollars in a month to maintain their smoking habit. However, e-cigarettes are cheap and reusable with a durable kit costing around 60 dollars and the average monthly coast for refilling being around 30 dollars. Although the initial acquisition cost is high, after one chooses their kit and refills to use, the monthly average cost for vaping goes down. The cost goes down to about 30 dollars a month, which is a 150 dollars saving in a month, 1740 dollars a year or 17400 dollars over a ten year period.
Next, e-cigarettes are more enjoyable to use. Cigarettes are acquired tastes that are enjoyed now because one forced themselves to like when they first started smoking. Vaping provides the user with a variety of flavors to choose from as e-cigarettes come in many different flavors that range from fruits, sodas, and other tobacco flavors. These flavors are enjoyable and closely resemble how they are supposed to taste.
Apart from the above reasons, conventional cigarette smoking is associated with other problems including bad breath and bad smell on smokers’ clothes. In addition, it leads to decreased ability to play sports, or physical activities because of breathing problems resulting from the tar lining left in the lungs after continuous use of tobacco cigarettes. Furthermore, tobacco smoking is also associated with increased risk of bone fractures and men develop problems having an erection, as well as sore throat and stained teeth all of which result from by tobacco cigarette smoking.
In rebuttal, claims have been made that there are e-cigarettes contain chemicals that are harmful to the human body. While this is true, nearly all of the millions of products we use daily contain toxic chemicals. For example, even the now very popular cell phone we use daily has been found to be harmful to the human body. Critics of e-cigarettes go further to claim that e-cigarettes contain cancer-causing elements especially if the cigarette breaks accidentally exposing the toxic elements to humans. While this may be true, it is also true that human beings need to take responsibility for themselves and the products they use. For instance, human beings should know that when an e-cigarette breaks, smoking it exposes the individual to harmful substances the same way a broken mobile phone earpiece will send electric shocks to the year thus causing harm. Fundamentally, training e-cigarette users to take responsibility will prevent any potential damage that could result from vaping. Despite these claims of injury from e-cigarettes, the benefits are enormous.
However, despite the strong support for e-cigarettes, I am against the e-cigarettes adverts and marketing strategies. E-cigarette companies have embarked on a media campaign where they are targeting adults as well as children claiming to help smokers quit while promoting lollipop flavored liquids that are attractive to children. These unwarranted adverts are targeting children air on television and radio with many of the adverts featuring celebrity adverts. While adults can make informed decisions on the use of the e-cigarette, children should not be exposed to them. It is, therefore, wrong for the e-cigarette manufacturers to expose children to the cigarettes through the adverts.
In conclusion, it is clear from the essay that the use of e-cigarettes or vaping is safer and healthier than the conventional cigarettes. Fundamentally, this is because they do not contain the all-harmful tobacco making them safe even for second-hand smokers. In addition, the e-cigarettes are much cheaper to use as compared to the conventional cigarettes. Finally, vaping provides users with the option of choosing from a wide range of flavors, which makes them more enjoyable to use. It is the above factors that make me support the use of the e-cigarette.