Introduction
The purpose of the study conducted by Gallo et al. (2015) was to investigate inadvertent encounters with Visual Flight Rules (VFR) -Instrument Meteorological Conditions (IMC) among General Aviation (GA) pilots through the interface of the latter’s first-hand experiences.
The need for the study was supported by the fact that the phenomenon of the link between IMC and VFR had already been researched in several past studies. Nevertheless, there was one important limitation related to the previous research projects – they all employed either mixed or quantitative methodology to address causal factors related to VFR-into-IMC cases (Gallo et al., 2015). Instead of conducting a literature review on pilot characteristics and weather conditions, the authors felt the need to focus on a qualitative outlook on the first-hand experiences of GA pilots.
The three research questions were defined by Gallo et al. (2015) rather clearly:
- In what way do pilots use weather-related information throughout their VFR-into-IMC flight?
- What are pilots’ thoughts and actions when they realize they are in IMC?
- What are pilots’ retrospective thoughts on their VFR-into-IMC flight experience?
Methodology
There were two purposive samples prepared for the current research. Gallo et al. (2015) found six and five male pilots from 2014 and 2015, respectively. The participants had to experience the VFR-into-IMC phenomenon at least once in order to be included in the sample. The summary of their experiences was utilized to compile the ultimate review of qualitative evidence consisting of first-hand involvements related to inadvertent exposure to the VFR-into-IMC phenomenon.
The research was conducted over a two-year period by a team of investigators from various backgrounds related to aviation. The authors of the paper ensured they would conduct relevant analysis and make the paper as replicable as possible (Gallo et al., 2015). Every element of the study design was well-thought-out to review personal experiences in the most comprehensive, yet coherent way possible.
All the data were collected by means of a qualitative methodology called phenomenology. It was appropriate for the research conducted by Gallo et al. (2015) because it related to a lived phenomenon, such as an inadvertent VFR-into-IMC flight. The answers to the research questions mentioned above were collected using grounded theory. Overall, the triangulation could be deemed successful because Gallo et al. (2015) were able to gather and process all the data inductively.
The researchers quoted the four perspectives on the effectiveness of qualitative research by addressing credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability. Credibility was defined as an opportunity to attain structural corroboration and adequate interpretations of collected data (Gallo et al., 2015). Transferability was achieved by evaluating the similarities between addressed topics and the descriptive adequacy of respective insights. Gallo et al. (2015) attained a high level of dependability by showcasing the patterns that could be tangible across various respondents’ answers. Finally, confirmability was achieved through adequate triangulation and consistent peer reviews.
Results and Findings
There were two stages that were completed to finalize the data analysis for the current project. First, the respondents’ answers were aligned against the research questions. Second, Gallo et al. (2015) identified common themes and trends in the existing answers to finalize the data analysis. The NVIVO software package was utilized to categorize every common theme and respective subcategories. At this point, the grounded theory approach was successfully applied by the researchers to address the VFR-into-IMC phenomenon.
An interesting finding presented by Gallo et al. (2015) was that weather briefings did not seem to prevent pilots from inadvertent VFR-into-IMC flights. It was also consistent with the existing literature on the subject, where fatal incidents were addressed as one of the key precedents to weather briefings. Another major finding was that some of the pilots could utilize their experience to recognize weather changes on the fly and escape or avoid IMC. Gallo et al. (2015) suggested that alternative-site landings and below-the-weather flights were the most common evasion strategies. Finally, it was interesting to see that not all pilots had the ability (or strength) to report their VFR-into-IMC experiences. Thus, the anxiety displayed by GA pilots has to be addressed in future research projects in order to see how those pilots could be motivated to report various adverse events more often.
First, it was rather important that any of the pilots engaged in VFR-into-IMC flights would obtain vital information regarding weather conditions prior to each of their next flights. That would tangibly assist them in terms of avoiding certain threats and remaining calm throughout the flight. Another takeaway from the study conducted by Gallo et al. (2015) was that the majority of GA pilots could deviate from the planned altitude or route due to anxiety. The biggest finding that has to be considered when dwelling on Gallo et al.’s (2015) findings is that numerous GA pilots who survived VFR-into-IMC flights were much more vigilant when looking at weather predictions and course revisions.
Critique
There have been numerous studies revolving around VFR and IMC and theories that contributed to the connection between the two concepts. The need for the study was adequately defined by Gallo et al. (2015), who claimed that past studies did not consider several important factors related to pilot characteristics, weather conditions, and weather products utilized by pilots. According to Gallo et al. (2015), it was essential to collect primary data in order to gain a better understanding of how situation assessment and resource allocation could be improved. The study conducted by Gallo et al. (2015) was necessary because it went beyond mere descriptive studies from the past and presented the audience with a qualitative outlook on the issue, with the respondents sharing personal experiences. Thus, all the previous literature on the subject was strengthened by means of the new quantitative and qualitative bits of evidence that surrounded the VFR-into-IMC phenomenon.
The researchers seem to have made a number of crucial inferences that contributed to a rather high level of credibility (validity and reliability combined). The findings presented by Gallo et al. (2015) are consistent enough to be considered rigorous. The investigators utilized a number of different perspectives in order to discuss the phenomenon of the VFR-into-IMC, so it also contributes to a high level of transferability as well. For example, credibility was achieved by establishing a strong consensus between existing evidence and the new information acquired by Gallo et al. (2015).
Despite the overall strengths of the research study design, there were challenges associated with data triangulation (Gallo et al., 2015). Thus, transferability had to be managed by addressing similarities and the adequacy of past studies and new evidence. In a similar fashion, the limitations of the study were addressed in an attempt to compare the findings from the literature review to the first-hand experiences of the pilots included in the sample. Gallo et al. (2015) also paid close attention to the topics of dependability and confirmability, as they tried to find as many common themes as possible and utilize triangulation methods, respectively.
The thick description of the research conducted by Gallo et al. (2015) included a thorough outlook on how the VFR-into-IMC phenomenon aligns against the past research on the subject from other countries. For example, the data from Canada were consistent with relevant American findings, with a certain number of GA accidents and fatalities. The researchers claimed that the occurrence rate of accidents did not decrease with time, so VFR-into-IMC accidents could be considered a constant variable among GA pilots. Given that Gallo et al.’s (2015) findings support quite a few important notes from past research, their thick description of all the interrelated phenomena can be deemed plausible and applicable to real-life scenarios. It was also covered by Gallo et al. (2015) that there could be laboratory-based explanations for the issues experienced by GA pilots. Knowing that there were no other studies that addressed the subject from the qualitative standpoint, the researchers’ thick description of the issue could be considered detailed, evidence-based, and coherent enough to drive additional research in the area.
Speaking of weather considerations and expectations, the researchers came up with a number of collective findings that reinforced the importance of anticipating complex weather conditions and other related factors. It was concluded by Gallo et al. (2015) that pre-flight meteorological circumstances could cause pilots to fly into IMC unintentionally. Therefore, the majority of findings that have been covered within that section were adequately associated with personal interpretations generated by pilots in an attempt to predict their own actions during the flight.
As for the topic of thoughts and actions, Gallo et al. (2015) stated that study participants experienced a multitude of emotions that could affect the quality of their piloting. The authors were consistent enough in describing how unexpected variables could affect the decisions made by GA pilots. The feelings of worry and apprehensiveness were pointed out by the researchers in order to show that there was a direct association between how pilot perceived their challenges and the level of skill they possessed. The latter was expected to help the pilots overcome the aforementioned challenge with minimum damage given to the aircraft and other resources.
The conclusions regarding post-flight experiences were important because they allowed the authors to articulate the need for anticipation and pre-flight briefings related to weather conditions. Gallo et al. (2015) were able to provide the audience with a rather detailed account of IMC and the role of comprehensive knowledge tests in terms of improving VFR-into-IMC experiences. The lack of knowledge that was identified by the researchers could be considered a fundamental contributor to the existing base of evidence since VFR-only pilots were found to be less experienced than their ATP, CFI, and IR pilot counterparts.
One of the biggest weaknesses of the study conducted by Gallo et al. (2015) is that personal characteristics and previous flight experiences were not included in the research. On the other hand, the investigators did not conduct any follow-up sessions to validate their results. Finally, there were questionnaire items that were prepared collectively, with no individualized entries prepared for certain pilots. Therefore, the only insights were collected in regard to VFR-into-IMC flights (Gallo et al., 2015). Also, the role of simulations, female pilot participation, and updated instruction curricula was not evidently reinforced in order to contribute to the potential future research. As for the strengths of the research project completed by Gallo et al. (2015), the biggest one was a thorough emphasis on weather training and its importance for GA pilots. The level of data triangulation was high enough to be considered adequate and provide the audience with a proper outlook on VFR-into-IMC flights. The authors also identified the deficiencies in their research and provided a set of recommendations to be implemented in future investigations on the subject.
Conclusion
The credence of the study has to be perceived through the prism of how Gallo et al. (2015) were able to answer the research questions and present the evidence on the three previously identified subtopics. Overall, it is safe to say that the most attention has been paid to the domain of weather conditions and expectations. Gallo et al. (2015) were able to suggest that some of the pilots could get themselves in more trouble while relying too much on the existing forecasts. The concept of thoughts and actions was also researched in rich detail, allowing Gallo et al. (2015) to conclude that IMC was considered a serious source of threats for GA pilots because it made them worrisome and anxious. The notion of post-flight experiences was also important for a better understanding of the VFR-into-IMC phenomenon, but Gallo et al. (2015) did not collect enough evidence regarding weather-evaluation skills, in-flight planning, and other skills that could be vital for GA pilots.
Reference
Gallo, M. A., Alhallaf, H., Baran, S., Cremer, I., Finn, C., Maharaj, I.,… & Uhuegho, K. O. (2015). Inadvertent VFR-into-IMC flights: A qualitative approach to describing GA pilots’ first-hand experiences. The Collegiate Aviation Review International, 33(2), 27-52. Web.