Distance-Based Self-Spacing in Arrival Streams

Transferring the spacing task from the air traffic controllerto the pilot can benefit efficiency and capacity and reduces controller workload. To s a chain of aircraft time-based spacing principles, where aircraft are to remain a certain time behing each other, are preferable over distance-based principles that require a constant distance between successive aircraft. Research showed that time-based spacing yields better performance in case of gradual reducing speeds in arrival streams. The presentday air traffic control environment, however, operates mainly ona spatial rather than a temporal basis. Controllers monitor the distance between trailing aircraft to determine if separation requirements are satisfied. If the disadvantages of distance-based spacing could be dealt with, distance-based spacing procedures can be implemented with far less implications for the current controller’s and pilot’s working environment compared to time-based procedures. This study tackles the main disadvantage of distance-based spacing, the slow-down effect, and presents the spacing reduction concept as a solution for dealing with a gradual reduction of speed during an arrival. Various displays and procedures were tested during a piloted experiment. It is shown that distance-based spacing procedures can produce a stable chain of up to five aircraft and that the pilot workload induced by the spacing task is low.

[1]  Eric Hoffman,et al.  Operational concepts for limited delegation of separation assurance to the cockpit , 1999 .

[2]  Kirk C. Benson,et al.  Experimental study of cockpit displays of traffic information for pilot self-spacing in congested airspace , 2003, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[3]  Eric Hoffman,et al.  SPACING INSTRUCTIONS IN APPROACH: ASSESSING USABILITY FROM THE AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLER PERSPECTIVE , 2003 .

[4]  D. H. Williams.  Time-based self-spacing techniques using cockpit display of traffic information during approach to landing in a terminal area vectoring environment , 1983 .

[5]  Terence S. Abbott.  Speed Control Law for Precision Terminal Area In-Trail Self Spacing , 2002 .

[6]  Amy R. Pritchett.  Simultaneous design of cockpit display of traffic information and air traffic management procedures , 1998 .

[7]  A. R. Pritchett,et al.  Pilot-Performed In-Trail Spacing and Merging: An Experimental Study , 2003 .

[8]  J. A. Sorensen,et al.  Analysis of in-trail following dynamics of CDTI-equipped aircraft , 1983 .

[9]  John-Paul Clarke,et al.  Pilot Support for Separation Assurance during Decelerating Approaches , 2004 .

[10]  S. Hart,et al.  Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research , 1988 .

[11]  Karim Zeghal,et al.  TOWARDS THE USE OF SPACING INSTRUCTION. ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF SPACING TOLERANCE ON FLIGHT CREW ACTIVITY , 2003 .

[12]  David H. Williams.  Self-Separation in Terminal Areas Using CDTI , 1983 .

[13]  Eric Hoffman,et al.  DELEGATION OF CROSSING OPERATIONS TO THE FLIGHT CREW FIRST QUANTITATIVE RESULTS , 2001 .

[14]  Eric Hoffman,et al.  Delegation of sequencing operations to the flight crew from a controller perspective - First quantitative results , 2001 .

[15]  Anand D. Mundra,et al.  Evaluation of Near-Term Applications for ADS-B/CDTI Implementation , 1998 .

[16]  A R Pritchett,et al.  Pilot Performance on New ATM Operations: Maintaining In-Trail Separation and Arrival Sequencing , 2000 .

[17]  Dan Ivanescu,et al.  ANALYSIS OF CONSTANT TIME DELAY AIRBORNE SPACING BETWEEN AIRCRAFT OF MIXED TYPES IN VARYING WIND CONDITIONS , 2003 .

[18]  Gary Slater.  Dynamics of Self-Spacing in a Stream of In-Trail Aircraft , 2002 .