In the 1989 UA 232 plane crash, the intervention of an expert pilot significantly reduced the loss of life. I am discussing the contrasting views of Kahneman and Klein on expert decision-making and their convergence, using this case as an example.
Kplastique, CC BY-SA 4.0
via Wikimedia Commons
The 1989 United Airlines Flight 232 crash landing is a profound illustration of crisis management and intuitive expertise in extreme challenges [1].
On July 19, 1989, United Airlines Flight 232, traveling from Denver to Chicago, experienced a catastrophic failure of its tail-mounted engine, resulting in a complete loss of hydraulic control. This DC-10 aircraft was equipped with three engines: two on the wings and one on the tail. When the tail engine failed, the crew lost all directional control, leaving them able to maneuver the plane only slightly to the right. In this dire situation, neither the cockpit crew nor air traffic control appeared to have any viable options for landing the rapidly descending aircraft.
Then, a cabin crew member knocked on the door and informed them that United Airlines DC-10 instructor captain Dennis Fitch, who was among the passengers, could assist. At that time, Fitch was a captain with 23,000 hours of flight experience, including three thousand hours on DC-10s. Drawing on his experience and intuition, Fitch devised a method to steer the plane by adjusting the speed of the engines on the right and left wings. He proposed and helped implement this unconventional approach to controlling the aircraft.
This approach was not part of any written procedure or protocol but stemmed from Fitch's profound understanding of the aircraft's behavior and his intuitive grasp of the situation. Following Fitch's directives, by simply controlling the engine speed, they were able to maneuver and adjust the aircraft's height and orientation, thus aligning with the runway.
The flight crew, led by Captain Al Haynes and training specialist Dennis Fitch, successfully landed the plane at Sioux Gateway Airport in Sioux City, Iowa. However, they could not cut engine power—doing so would have resulted in a loss of steering—and therefore could not reduce the airplane's speed to a safe landing velocity. When the landing gear touched the ground, the plane broke apart into three large pieces.
As a result, 184 of the 296 passengers and crew survived the incident, rather than the total loss of all lives. Fitch's solution was not part of standard procedures; rather, it was an improvised response to an unprecedented situation that showcased the application of intuitive expertise under pressure.
We can analyze the flight crew's actions through the lenses of Daniel Kahneman and Gary Klein's perspectives on intuition and expertise. Kahneman, recognized for his work on heuristics and biases, and Klein, a proponent of naturalistic decision-making, are often viewed as having conflicting opinions on the nature of expert intuition. Kahneman contends that there is a risk that rapid intuitive decisions, even those made by experts, can be biased and prone to errors and that detailed procedures and protocols should be established to mitigate this risk.
Gary Klein, conversely, highlights that in complex scenarios, particularly those that are high-pressure, high-risk, and uncertain, experienced experts or leaders are far more likely to achieve successful outcomes when they rely on solutions stemming from their intuition and tacit knowledge, coupled with a quick mental simulation to assess their viability.
In this instance, the pilots were navigating an unpredictable environment, facing significant risks and time constraints, yet their extensive experience allowed them to acknowledge their limited control and devise an innovative, untested solution to avert disaster.
The flight crew's decision-making process appears to align with Klein's Recognition-Primed Decision (RPD) model, which posits that experts make choices by recognizing patterns and leveraging their experience.
Simultaneously, Kahneman's focus on the significance of feedback and learning in cultivating intuition seems relevant here, as the crew's actions were informed by their knowledge and experience regarding aircraft behavior. Kahneman and Klein diverge on the validity of expert or leader judgment, particularly in complex situations marked by uncertainty.
While Kahneman's research is more theoretical or based on controlled experiments, Klein and his team's research relies on observing individuals in real-world settings (firefighters, medical teams, military units, Wall Street professionals, chess players, etc.) and subsequently interviewing them.
During his lifetime, Kahneman had numerous opportunities to debate Klein. They even collaborated on an article highlighting their points of agreement. In their joint piece "Conditions for Intuitive Expertise: A Failure to Disagree [2]," they examined the circumstances under which intuitive judgment can be deemed reliable [2].
The Flight 232 disaster emerged as an unexpected and unprecedented challenge where standard procedures proved inadequate. However, Fitch's extensive experience and training provided him with a profound understanding of the aircraft's systems, enabling him to intuitively manage the crisis. Fitch's actions align with Kahneman and Klein's assertion that true expertise arises when individuals can adapt their skills to new situations and apply their intuitive insights in innovative ways.
Kahneman and Klein also highlight the significance of feedback in cultivating intuitive expertise. In this instance, immediate feedback from the aircraft's response to manual engine control allowed Fitch and the crew to continuously adjust their approach, ultimately resulting in a partially successful emergency landing.
Klein's distinctive concept here is the recognition of the situation by leaders or experts. The recognition-primed decision (RPD) process described by Klein was evident when Dennis Fitch, the expert in this incident, entered the cockpit and learned that the hydraulic controls were nonfunctional. He assessed the situation and understood that he was confronting a completely new challenge. This prompted Fitch to discard all materials (procedures, manuals, evidence-based decision-making processes, protocols, etc.) in his mind and conclude that a novel solution was necessary. At that moment, Fitch, who understood the airplane, began to implement the first solution that came to mind. This realization is where experts and leaders excel. It underscores the necessity for training that transcends rote memorization of procedures and fosters the development of a deep, intuitive understanding of complex systems.
This approach can empower individuals to make critical decisions during crises and potentially save lives when every second matters. It is important to note that the McDonnell Douglas pilots who loaded the data from the plane's recovered black box into the simulator were unable to land the aircraft in the simulator, using procedures or otherwise, until they sought the assistance of Dennis Fitch, which allowed them to land it once, albeit by accident.
The legacy of UA 232 illustrates the significance of true experts, experience, and the intuition and tacit knowledge that accompany it when facing seemingly insurmountable challenges.
[1] Fields of Fortune: The crash of United Airlines flight 232 | by Admiral Cloudberg | Medium
[2] Kahneman, D., & Klein, G. (2009). Conditions for intuitive expertise: A failure to disagree. American Psychologist, 64(6), 515-526. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016755