The next generation air transportation system: An approach to function allocation

A method for function allocation was developed and applied to the conflict detection and resolution problem in the next generation air transportation system. The method identifies key capabilities required of agents, automated or human, to achieve the goals of the system through state-based modeling. For conflict detection and resolution in the next generation air transportation system, those capabilities include the ability to accurately identify current separation, predict future losses of separation and collisions, and identify four-dimensional trajectory changes that, when implemented, will result in proper future separation. The modeling method feeds into an analysis of potential levels of automation across four stages of information processing, yielding a taxonomy of possible function allocation schemes, which can then be analyzed with respect to system and operator performance needs. The taxonomy is identified and analyzed for the current and future conflict detection and resolution system in air traffic control. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

[1]  Heinz Erzberger,et al.  Concept for Next Generation Air Traffic Control System , 2002 .

[2]  Volodymyr Kharchenko,et al.  EUROPEAN AIR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT MASTER PLAN , 2011 .

[3]  Henk A. P. Blom,et al.  Modelling Lateral Spacing and Separation for Airborne Separation Assurance Using Petri Nets , 2007, Simul..

[4]  Victor Carreño,et al.  Conflict Prevention and Separation Assurance in Small Aircraft Transportation Systems , 2008 .

[5]  Heinz Erzberger,et al.  Transforming the NAS: The Next Generation Air Traffic Control System , 2013 .

[6]  Steven J. Landry,et al.  Separation Assurance and Collision Avoidance Concepts for the Next Generation Air Transportation System , 2009, HCI.

[7]  Steven J. Landry,et al.  State-based modeling of continuous human-integrated systems: An application to air traffic separation assurance , 2010, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[8]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  False Alerts in Air Traffic Control Conflict Alerting System: Is There a “Cry Wolf” Effect? , 2009, Hum. Factors.

[9]  David McNally,et al.  Concept and Laboratory Analysis of Trajectory-Based Automation for Separation Assurance , 2007 .

[10]  Mark Peters,et al.  A DECENTRALIZED CONTROL STRATEGY FOR DISTRIBUTED AIR/GROUND TRAFFIC SEPARATION , 2000 .

[11]  Peter A. Hancock,et al.  On the Process of Automation Transition in Multitask Human–Machine Systems , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans.

[12]  Steven J. Landry,et al.  Roadmap for the next generation of dynamic function allocation theories and strategies , 2011 .

[13]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation , 2000, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A.

[14]  Thomas Prevot,et al.  Initial Study of Controller/Automation Integration for NextGen Separation Assurance , 2008 .

[15]  Raja Parasuraman,et al.  Designing for Flexible Interaction Between Humans and Automation: Delegation Interfaces for Supervisory Control , 2007, Hum. Factors.