High levels of automation in future aviation technologies such as Unmanned Aircraft Systems could lead to human operators losing essential Situation Awareness and becoming ‘out-of-the-loop’. Research into Human Autonomy Teaming proposes that improved communication between the human and autonomous agents of a system can address this problem. However, knowledge around the effect of automation audio communication is lacking in the literature and we propose audio-voice conversation would provide the optimum form of communication. In this study we evaluated the impact that providing a conversational interface to a synthetic teammate had on the performance, Situation Awareness and perception of teaming of the human teammate. Twenty-four participants conducted experimental trials on a computer-based task adapted from a Levels Of Automation test method developed by Endsley and Kaber ( 1999 Endsley, M. R. , and D. B.Kaber . 1999. “Level of Automation Effects on Performance, Situation Awareness and Workload in a Dynamic Control Task.” Ergonomics 42 (3): 462–492. doi:10.1080/001401399185595. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar] ). The results show that synthetic voice communication had a significant positive effect on human performance and perception of teaming. Also demonstrated was that teaming structure has an effect on how that performance increases, with participants in higher Levels Of Automation where the automation provides decision making advice demonstrating a habit of consistently following voice provided advice, even when that advice results in the participant adopting new behaviours and taking more risks.

Much of the research and proposed industrial deployment of Remote Operations (ROs) in support of automated vehicles is founded on the optimistic premise that in-vehicle standby drivers and Safety Officers (SOs) can easily be replaced with ROs, with some commercial models proposing that a single RO supervise over 30 vehicles. However, emerging evidence suggests that the RO task is fundamentally different from the in-vehicle driving task. Furthermore, communications latency and reliability constraints, coupled with fragmented attention and altered task demands, introduce distinctive human factor challenges. These include degraded situational awareness, increased cognitive workload, and reduced capacity for timely intervention. The result is a widening gap between what is commercially desirable and what may be operationally appropriate. This paper argues that the central question for remote operation in support of automated vehicles is not one of technical feasibility but of human-centred appropriateness, and debates which RO roles should continue to be developed and which should be constrained or avoided. We present a synthesis of research on remote vehicle operations, identifying recurring human-factor limitations and mapping them to proposed remote tasks. The paper concludes with targeted recommendations for designers, operators, and regulators intended to question the scaling of teleoperation models and to reframe the debate from “Can we teleoperate?” to “Under what conditions should we?”