Enea, Gabriele | Search NASA

NASA NTRS2017

Assessment of Air Traffic Controller Acceptability of Aircrew Route Change Requests

NASA developed the traffic aware strategic aircrew requests concept for a cockpit automation that identifies route improvements and advises the aircrew to request the change from the air traffic controller. In order to increase the chance of air traffic control approval, the automation ensures that the route is clear of known traffic, weather, and airspace restrictions. Hence the technology is anticipated to provide benefits in areas such as flight efficiency, flight schedule compliance, passenger comfort, and pilot and controller workload. In support of a field trial of a prototype of the technology, observations were conducted at the Atlanta and Jacksonville air traffic control centers to identify the main factors that affect the acceptability of aircrew requests by air traffic controllers. Observers shadowed air traffic controllers as the test flight pilot made pre-scripted requests to invoke acceptability issues and then they interviewed voluntarily fifty controllers with experience ranging from one to thirty-five years. The most common reason for rejecting requests is conflicting with traffic followed by violating air traffic procedures, increasing sector workload, and conflicting with major arrival and departure flows and flow restrictions. Quantitative parameters such as the distance that a route should maintain from sector boundaries and special use airspace were identified and recommended for inclusion in the automation.

Flight Optimization; Field Trial↗

NASA NTRS2017

Assessment of Air Traffic Controller Acceptability of Aircrew Route Change Requests

NASA developed the traffic aware strategic aircrew requests concept for a cockpit automation that identifies route improvements and advises the aircrew to request the change from the air traffic controller. In order to increase the chance of air traffic control approval, the automation ensures that the route is clear of known traffic, weather, and airspace restrictions. Hence the technology is anticipated to provide benefits in areas such as flight efficiency, flight schedule compliance, passenger comfort, and pilot and controller workload. In support of a field trial of a prototype of the technology, observations were conducted at the Atlanta and Jacksonville air traffic control centers to identify the main factors that affect the acceptability of aircrew requests by air traffic controllers. Observers shadowed air traffic controllers as the test flight pilot made pre-scripted requests to invoke acceptability issues and then they interviewed voluntarily fifty controllers with experience ranging from one to thirty-five years. The most common reason for rejecting requests is conflicting with traffic followed by violating air traffic procedures, increasing sector workload, and conflicting with major arrival and departure flows and flow restrictions. Quantitative parameters such as the distance that a route should maintain from sector boundaries and special use airspace were identified and recommended for inclusion in the automation.

Flight Optimization; Field Trial↗

NASA NTRS2016

Function Allocation between Automation and Human Pilot for Airborne Separation Assurance

Maintaining safe separation between aircraft is a key determinant of the airspace capacity to handle air transportation. With the advent of satellite-based surveillance, aircraft equipped with the needed technologies are now capable of maintaining awareness of their location in the airspace and sharing it with their surrounding traffic. As a result, concepts and cockpit automation are emerging to enable delegating the responsibility of maintaining safe separation from traffic to the pilot; thus increasing the airspace capacity by alleviating the limitation of the current non-scalable centralized ground-based system. In this paper, an analysis of allocating separation assurance functions to the human pilot and cockpit automation is presented to support the design of these concepts and technologies. A task analysis was conducted with the help of Petri nets to identify the main separation assurance functions and their interactions. Each function was characterized by three behavior levels that may be needed to perform the task: skill, rule and knowledge based levels. Then recommendations are made for allocating each function to an automation scale based on their behavior level characterization and with the help of Subject matter experts.

Idris, Husni↗

NASA NTRS2016

TASAR Flight Trial 2: Assessment of Air Traffic Controller Acceptability of TASAR Requests

In support of the Flight Trial (FT-2) of NASA's prototype of the Traffic Aware Strategic Aircrew Requests (TASAR) concept, observations were conducted at the air traffic facilities to identify and assess the main factors that affect the acceptability of pilot requests by air traffic controllers. Two observers shadowed air traffic controllers at the Atlanta (ZTL) and Jacksonville (ZJX) air traffic control centers as the test flight pilot made pre-scripted requests to invoke acceptability issues and then they interviewed the observed and other controllers voluntarily. Fifty controllers were interviewed with experience ranging from one to thirty-five years. All interviewed controllers were enthusiastic about the technology and accounting for sector boundaries in pilot requests, particularly if pilots can be made aware of high workload situations. All interviewed controllers accept more than fifty percent of pilot requests; forty percent of them reject less than ten percent of requests. The most common reason for rejecting requests is conflicting with traffic followed by violating letters of agreement (LOAs) and negatively impacting neighboring sector workload, major arrival and departure flows and flow restrictions. Thirty-six requests were made during the test, eight of which were rejected due to: the aircraft already handed off to another sector, violating LOA, opposing traffic, intruding into an active special use airspace (SUA), intruding into another center, weather, and unfamiliarity with the requested waypoint. Nine requests were accepted with delay mostly because the controller needed to locate unfamiliar waypoints or to coordinate with other controllers.

Idris, Husni↗

NASA NTRS2010

Definition and Demonstration of a Methodology for Validating Aircraft Trajectory Predictors

This paper presents a new methodology for validating an aircraft trajectory predictor, inspired by the lessons learned from a number of field trials, flight tests and simulation experiments for the development of trajectory-predictor-based automation. The methodology introduces new techniques and a new multi-staged approach to reduce the effort in identifying and resolving validation failures, avoiding the potentially large costs associated with failures during a single-stage, pass/fail approach. As a case study, the validation effort performed by the Federal Aviation Administration for its En Route Automation Modernization (ERAM) system is analyzed to illustrate the real-world applicability of this methodology. During this validation effort, ERAM initially failed to achieve six of its eight requirements associated with trajectory prediction and conflict probe. The ERAM validation issues have since been addressed, but to illustrate how the methodology could have benefited the FAA effort, additional techniques are presented that could have been used to resolve some of these issues. Using data from the ERAM validation effort, it is demonstrated that these new techniques could have identified trajectory prediction error sources that contributed to several of the unmet ERAM requirements.

Vivona, Robert A.↗