Differences in Pilot Automation Philosophies in the

G-induced loss of consciousness (G-LOC) is a pilot human factors (HF) problem that plagues all air forces that fly high performance fighter aircraft. Spatial disorientation (SD) is an even more serious HF problem that affects not only the military but also commercial aviation. By some estimates, one out of every four aircraft mishaps is due to a HF problem, and the pilot flies a perfectly operating aircraft into the terrain. Altitude warning systems and other voice or buzzer devices in the cockpit have been relatively ineffective at reducing the number of mishaps. In order to stem the tremendous loss of pilots and aircraft because of HF-related mishaps, the US Air Force and Russian Air Force have developed automated collision avoidance systems. The US Air Force has developed a Ground Collision Avoidance System (GCAS) that is automatic and requires no pilot intervention. The philosophy behind this system is reliability, pilot unobtrusiveness, and invisibility. The Russians have also developed a pilot state monitoring system that is automatic, but includes the pilot in its control loop. The Russian system even includes an onboard video camera that allows ground operators to observe the pilot during the mission. The objective of this paper is to discuss these two automated collision avoidance systems and to distinguish between the roles of the human in both systems.