Reducing Drone Incidents by Incorporating Human Factors in the Drone and Drone Pilot Accreditation Process

Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1210)


Considering the ever-increasing use of drones in a plentitude of application areas, the risk is that also an ever-increasing number of drone incidents would be observed. Research has shown that a large majority of all incidents with drones is due not to technological, but to human error. An advanced risk-reduction methodology, focusing on the human element, is thus required in order to allow for the safe use of drones. In this paper, we therefore introduce a novel concept to provide a qualitative and quantitative assessment of the performance of the drone operator. The proposed methodology is based on one hand upon the development of standardized test methodologies and on the other hand on human performance modeling of the drone operators in a highly realistic simulation environment.


Human factors Drones Performance analysis 


  1. 1.
    Chow, E., Cuadra, A., Whitlock, C.: Hazard Above: Drone Crash Database - Fallen from the skies. The Washington Post, Washington, D.C., 19 January 2016 (2016)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Shively, J.: Human performance issues in remotely piloted aircraft systems. In: ICAO Conference on Remotely Piloted or Piloted: Sharing One Aerospace System (2015)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Deutsch, S.: UAV operator human performance models. BBN Report No. 8460. Technical report (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bertuccelli, L.F., Beckers, N.W.M., Cummings, M.L.: Developing operator models for UAV search scheduling. In: Proceeding of AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference, Toronto, Canada (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wu, Y., Huang, Z., Li, Y., Wang, Z.: Modeling multioperator multi-UAV operator attention allocation problem based on maximizing the global reward. In: Mathematical Problems in Engineering (2016)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jacoff, A., Saidi, K.: Measuring and comparing small unmanned aircraft system capabilities and pilot proficiency using standard test methods. NIST report, April 2017Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Doroftei, D., De Cubber, G., Wagemans, R., Matos, A., Silva, E., Lobo, V., Cardoso, G., Chintamani, K., Govindaraj, S., Gancet, J., Serrano, D.: User-centered design. In: De Cubber, G., Doroftei, D. (eds.) Search and rescue robotics - from theory to practice. InTech (2017)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Shah, S., Dey, D., Lovett, C., Kapoor, A.: AirSim: high-fidelity visual and physical simulation for autonomous vehicles. In: Field and Service Robotics, vol. 5, pp. 621–635. Springer (2017)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    European Commission: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/947 of 24 May 2019 on the rules and procedures for the operation of unmanned aircraft (2020)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Doroftei, D., Matos, A., Silva, E., Lobo, V., Wagemans, R., De Cubber, G.: Operational validation of robots for risky environments. In: Proceeding of 8th IARP Workshop on Robotics for Risky Environments, Lisbon, Portugal (2015)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    De Cubber, G., Doroftei, D., Balta, H., Matos, A., Silva, E., Serrano, D., Govindaraj, S., Roda, R., Lobo, V., Marques, M., Wagemans, R.: Operational validation of search and rescue robots. In: De Cubber, G., Doroftei, D., (eds.) Search and Rescue Robotics - From Theory to Practice. InTech (2017)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Royal Military AcademyBrusselsBelgium

Personalised recommendations