Search NASA⌕ Search
Home/Archive/NASA NTRS

NASA NTRS · 20150010220

Operational Collision Avoidance

Guit, Bill
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

This presentation will describe the early days of the EOS Aqua and Aura operational collision avoidance process. It will highlight EOS debris avoidance maneuvers, EOS high interest event statistic and A-Train systematic conjunctions and conclude with future challenges. This is related to earlier e-DAA (tracking number 21692) that an abstract was submitted to a different conference. Eric Moyer, ESMO Deputy Project Manager has reviewed and approved this presentation on May 6, 2015

Explore related subjects

collision avoidanceconjuntion assessmentoperationals

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Guit, Bill. 2015-05-19. Operational Collision Avoidance. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20150010220

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related reports

NASA NTRS2017

Ensuring Interoperability between UAS Detect-and-Avoid and Manned Aircraft Collision Avoidance

The UAS community in the United States has identified the need for a collision avoidance region in which UAS Detect-and-Avoid (DAA) vertical guidance is restricted to preclude interoperability issues with manned aircraft collision avoidance system vertical resolution advisories (RAs). This paper documents the process by which the collision avoidance region was defined. Three candidate definitions were evaluated on 1.3 million simulated pairwise encounters between UAS and manned aircraft covering a wide range of horizontal and vertical closure rates, angles, and miss distances. They were evaluated with regard to UAS DAA interoperability with manned aircraft collision avoidance systems in terms of: 1) the primary objective of restricting DAA vertical guidance before RAs when the aircraft are close, and 2) the secondary objective of avoiding unnecessary restrictions of DAA vertical guidance at a DAA alert when the aircraft are further apart. The collision avoidance region definition that fully achieves the primary objective and best achieves the secondary objective was recommended to and accepted by the UAS community in the United States. By this definition, UAS and manned aircraft are in the collision avoidance region--during which DAA vertical guidance is restricted--when the time to closest point of approach is less than 50 seconds and either the time to co-altitude is less than 50 seconds or the current vertical separation is less than 800 feet.

collision avoidance↗
NASA NTRS2016

How Usability Testing Resulted in Improvements to Ground Collision Software for General Aviation: Improved Ground Collision Avoidance System (IGCAS)

The NASA improved Ground Collision Avoidance System (iGCAS) team conducted an onsite usability study at Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) Air Venture in Oshkosh, Wisconsin from July 19 through July 26, 2015. EAA Air Venture had approximately 550,000 attendees from which the sample pool of pilots were selected. The objectives of this study were to assess the overall appropriateness and acceptability of iGCAS as a warning system for General Aviation aircraft, usability of the iGCAS displays and audio cues, test terrain avoidance characteristics, performance, functionality, pilot response time, and correlate terrain avoidance performance and pilot response time data.

collision avoidance↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Display and Automation Considerations for the Airborne Collision Avoidance System Xu

In this paper we examine several display and automation considerations of a collision avoidance system that is currently under development: the Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS) Xu. This study builds on previous work conducted as part of NASA’s Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Integration into the National Airspace System (NAS) project. ACAS Xu represents the next-generation successor to the Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS II), wherein the Xu variant is intended for UAS applications. Whereas TCAS II exclusively issues RAs in the vertical dimension, a major distinction between ACAS Xu and previous collision avoidance (CA) systems is the introduction of horizontal and “blended” RAs (i.e., RAs with both horizontal and vertical components). This present work was conducted as an engineering analysis involving two parts. In Part 1, a two-by-two, within-subjects study was performed that manipulated how RAs were presented to a pilot situated at a UAS ground control station. Five participants experienced four experimental trials in which text and aural alerting characteristics were manipulated. In Part 2, another five participants experienced four trials in which the levels of automation were manipulated with regard to the CA and return-to-course (RTC) tasks. The results for Part 1 found no effect of display or alerting configuration on pilot performance. However, it was discovered that pilot response time to RAs greatly depended on the RA type. In particular, pilots were quicker to respond to vertical RAs (M = 4.52 seconds) than horizontal (M = 7.42 seconds) and blended (M = 9.68 seconds) RAs in which both dimensions were issued simultaneously. For Part 2 of the study, pilots found both auto-CA and auto-RTC functions equally useful. Most pilots were comfortable with the automation, however responses were mixed. Three of five participants indicated high levels of comfort with the auto-CA function, while two rated their comfort as low. Pilots’ comfort for the auto-RTC functionality was slightly higher: four out of five pilots gave high ratings, while one pilot gave a low rating. Overall, pilots ordinally ranked their preference for automated functions as auto-CA together with auto-RTC (when an aural alert announces a change between CA and RTC states), auto-CA, and auto-CA and RTC (without the aural state-change announcement). Recommendations for improving the display of automation are also discussed.

collision avoidance↗