Pilot Procedure-Following Behavior During Closely Spaced Parallel Approaches

A flight simulator experiment was run to examine pilot procedure-following behavior during closely spaced parallel approaches. Such approaches are being considered under the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) to increase the capacity of runway systems, possibly without the need to increase the footprint of airports. Pilots flying these approaches utilized a simple heuristic to fly the procedure consistently, despite the heuristic being suboptimal for any of the three conditions. Moreover, procedure compliance was relatively low, but noncompliance itself was not unsafe unless accompanied by situation awareness problems. In some cases, noncompliance could be shown to be a better choice than compliance. These results have implications for assumptions regarding procedure-following by pilots utilizing novel procedures in NextGen.

[1]  A.D. Mundra,et al.  Potential benefits of a Paired Approach procedure to closely spaced parallel runways in instrument and marginal visual conditions , 2008, 2008 IEEE/AIAA 27th Digital Avionics Systems Conference.

[2]  Steven J. Landry,et al.  Safe Zone for Closely Spaced Parallel Approaches , 2011 .

[3]  Eric M. Shank,et al.  Precision runway monitor , 1995 .

[4]  Samanant Paul,et al.  Description of the AILS Alerting Algorithm , 2000 .

[5]  Rodney Teo.  Computing danger zones for provably safe closely spaced parallel approaches: Theory and experiment , 2003 .

[6]  S Abbott Terence,et al.  Simulator Evaluation of Airborne Information for Lateral Spacing (AILS) Concept , 2001 .

[7]  Milan Janic,et al.  Modelling the capacity of closely-spaced parallel runways using innovative approach procedures , 2008 .

[8]  George C. Greene,et al.  Wake Turbulence Limits on Paired Approaches to Parallel Runways , 2000 .

[9]  Amy R. Pritchett,et al.  Software architecture for a reconfigurable flight simulator. , 2000 .

[10]  James K. Kuchar,et al.  Evaluation of Collision Avoidance Maneuvers for Parallel Approach , 1999 .

[11]  Gordon H. Hardy,et al.  Cockpit Display of Traffic and Wake Information for Closely Spaced Parallel Approaches , 2004 .

[12]  J.T. Williams,et al.  Reducing separation requirements through improved navigation and surveillance , 2008, 2008 Tyrrhenian International Workshop on Digital Communications - Enhanced Surveillance of Aircraft and Vehicles.

[13]  Jonathan Hammer.  Case Study of Paired Approach Procedure to Closely Spaced Parallel Runways , 2000 .

[14]  Amy R. Pritchett,et al.  Experimental Studies Of Pilot Performance At Collision Avoidance During Closely Spaced Parallel Approaches , 1997 .

[15]  Terence S. Abbott.  Flight Test Evaluation of the Airborne Information for Lateral Spacing (AILS) Concept , 2002 .

[16]  Rachelle L. Ennis,et al.  A Formal Approach to the Analysis of Aircraft Protected Zone , 2004 .

[17]  James K. Kuchar,et al.  Airborne Collision Alerting Logic for Closely Spaced Parallel Approach , 1997 .

[18]  Vernon J. Rossow.  Vortex-free flight corridors for aircraft executing compressed landing operations , 2006 .

[19]  James K. Kuchar,et al.  The Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System , 2007 .

[20]  Savita Verma,et al.  PRELIMINARY GUIDELINES ON FLIGHT DECK PROCEDURES FOR VERY CLOSELY SPACED PARALLEL APPROACHES , 2008 .

[21]  Gordon Hardy,et al.  Comparison of manual and autopilot breakout maneuvers with three closely spaced parallel runway approaches , 2009, 2009 IEEE/AIAA 28th Digital Avionics Systems Conference.

[22]  Vernon J. Rossow.  Reduction of Uncertainties in Prediction of Wake-Vortex Locations , 2000 .