Can we automate compliance to Collision Avoidance resolution advisories?

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

Abstract

The Traffic alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) was designed to prevent mid-air collisions by portraying a time-critical "resolution advisory" (RA) to the pilot. Complying with a TCAS RA is generally considered the safest course of action and takes priority over all other forms of air traffic management; however, pilot compliance with TCAS RAs is surprisingly low. One proposed solution is an 'Auto-RA' function which couples the autoflight system to TCAS such that, when the autopilot is engaged, it automatically executes any corrective RAs. This paper describes a study in an integrated flight deck/air traffic control simulator examining how pilots interact with TCAS with and without an 'Auto-RA' function. A prior study found that pilots allowed the autoflight system to fly the RA maneuver in 83% of the runs, but the situations where the pilots disconnected the Auto-RA function generally involved scenarios where pilots received confusing guidance from the RA, and conflicting instructions from air traffic control. Further, once clear of the conflict, pilots appeared to have trouble remembering which autoflight modes they had had engaged before the RA, and air traffic instructions requiring particular speed or altitude targets that were effectively erased by the Auto-RA function. Thus, this study particularly focused on particularly problematic traffic encounters, and on situations where the Auto-RA might disrupt pilots from meeting a specified air traffic restriction.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publication2014 International Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, HFES 2014
PublisherHuman Factors an Ergonomics Society Inc.
Pages97-101
Number of pages5
Volume2014-January
ISBN (Electronic)9780945289456
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2014
Event58th International Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, HFES 2014 - Chicago, United States
Duration: Oct 27 2014Oct 31 2014

Other

Other58th International Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, HFES 2014
CountryUnited States
CityChicago
Period10/27/1410/31/14

Fingerprint

Collision avoidance
traffic
Air traffic control
air traffic
Air
air traffic control
instruction
Simulators
Compliance
flight
air
scenario
management

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Human Factors and Ergonomics

Cite this

Pritchett, A. (2014). Can we automate compliance to Collision Avoidance resolution advisories? In 2014 International Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, HFES 2014 (Vol. 2014-January, pp. 97-101). Human Factors an Ergonomics Society Inc.. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931214581021
Pritchett, Amy. / Can we automate compliance to Collision Avoidance resolution advisories?. 2014 International Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, HFES 2014. Vol. 2014-January Human Factors an Ergonomics Society Inc., 2014. pp. 97-101
@inproceedings{37067f8b07774d95b6b9b22ad395e2f3,
title = "Can we automate compliance to Collision Avoidance resolution advisories?",
abstract = "The Traffic alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) was designed to prevent mid-air collisions by portraying a time-critical {"}resolution advisory{"} (RA) to the pilot. Complying with a TCAS RA is generally considered the safest course of action and takes priority over all other forms of air traffic management; however, pilot compliance with TCAS RAs is surprisingly low. One proposed solution is an 'Auto-RA' function which couples the autoflight system to TCAS such that, when the autopilot is engaged, it automatically executes any corrective RAs. This paper describes a study in an integrated flight deck/air traffic control simulator examining how pilots interact with TCAS with and without an 'Auto-RA' function. A prior study found that pilots allowed the autoflight system to fly the RA maneuver in 83{\%} of the runs, but the situations where the pilots disconnected the Auto-RA function generally involved scenarios where pilots received confusing guidance from the RA, and conflicting instructions from air traffic control. Further, once clear of the conflict, pilots appeared to have trouble remembering which autoflight modes they had had engaged before the RA, and air traffic instructions requiring particular speed or altitude targets that were effectively erased by the Auto-RA function. Thus, this study particularly focused on particularly problematic traffic encounters, and on situations where the Auto-RA might disrupt pilots from meeting a specified air traffic restriction.",
author = "Amy Pritchett",
year = "2014",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/1541931214581021",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "2014-January",
pages = "97--101",
booktitle = "2014 International Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, HFES 2014",
publisher = "Human Factors an Ergonomics Society Inc.",
address = "United States",

}

Pritchett, A 2014, Can we automate compliance to Collision Avoidance resolution advisories? in 2014 International Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, HFES 2014. vol. 2014-January, Human Factors an Ergonomics Society Inc., pp. 97-101, 58th International Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, HFES 2014, Chicago, United States, 10/27/14. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931214581021

Can we automate compliance to Collision Avoidance resolution advisories? / Pritchett, Amy.

2014 International Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, HFES 2014. Vol. 2014-January Human Factors an Ergonomics Society Inc., 2014. p. 97-101.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

TY - GEN

T1 - Can we automate compliance to Collision Avoidance resolution advisories?

AU - Pritchett, Amy

PY - 2014/1/1

Y1 - 2014/1/1

N2 - The Traffic alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) was designed to prevent mid-air collisions by portraying a time-critical "resolution advisory" (RA) to the pilot. Complying with a TCAS RA is generally considered the safest course of action and takes priority over all other forms of air traffic management; however, pilot compliance with TCAS RAs is surprisingly low. One proposed solution is an 'Auto-RA' function which couples the autoflight system to TCAS such that, when the autopilot is engaged, it automatically executes any corrective RAs. This paper describes a study in an integrated flight deck/air traffic control simulator examining how pilots interact with TCAS with and without an 'Auto-RA' function. A prior study found that pilots allowed the autoflight system to fly the RA maneuver in 83% of the runs, but the situations where the pilots disconnected the Auto-RA function generally involved scenarios where pilots received confusing guidance from the RA, and conflicting instructions from air traffic control. Further, once clear of the conflict, pilots appeared to have trouble remembering which autoflight modes they had had engaged before the RA, and air traffic instructions requiring particular speed or altitude targets that were effectively erased by the Auto-RA function. Thus, this study particularly focused on particularly problematic traffic encounters, and on situations where the Auto-RA might disrupt pilots from meeting a specified air traffic restriction.

AB - The Traffic alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) was designed to prevent mid-air collisions by portraying a time-critical "resolution advisory" (RA) to the pilot. Complying with a TCAS RA is generally considered the safest course of action and takes priority over all other forms of air traffic management; however, pilot compliance with TCAS RAs is surprisingly low. One proposed solution is an 'Auto-RA' function which couples the autoflight system to TCAS such that, when the autopilot is engaged, it automatically executes any corrective RAs. This paper describes a study in an integrated flight deck/air traffic control simulator examining how pilots interact with TCAS with and without an 'Auto-RA' function. A prior study found that pilots allowed the autoflight system to fly the RA maneuver in 83% of the runs, but the situations where the pilots disconnected the Auto-RA function generally involved scenarios where pilots received confusing guidance from the RA, and conflicting instructions from air traffic control. Further, once clear of the conflict, pilots appeared to have trouble remembering which autoflight modes they had had engaged before the RA, and air traffic instructions requiring particular speed or altitude targets that were effectively erased by the Auto-RA function. Thus, this study particularly focused on particularly problematic traffic encounters, and on situations where the Auto-RA might disrupt pilots from meeting a specified air traffic restriction.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84957610943&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84957610943&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1541931214581021

DO - 10.1177/1541931214581021

M3 - Conference contribution

VL - 2014-January

SP - 97

EP - 101

BT - 2014 International Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, HFES 2014

PB - Human Factors an Ergonomics Society Inc.

ER -

Pritchett A. Can we automate compliance to Collision Avoidance resolution advisories? In 2014 International Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, HFES 2014. Vol. 2014-January. Human Factors an Ergonomics Society Inc. 2014. p. 97-101 https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931214581021