详情

当前位置：首页> 国外交通科技报告数据库 >详情

原文传递 Comparison of Ground-Based and Airborne Function Allocation Concepts for NextGen Using Human-In-The-Loop Simulations

题名：	Comparison of Ground-Based and Airborne Function Allocation Concepts for NextGen Using Human-In-The-Loop Simulations
作者：	Wing, David J.; Prevot, Thomas; Murdoch, Jennifer L.; Cabrall, Christopher D.; Homola, Jeffrey R.; Martin, Lynne H.; Mercer, Joey S.; Hoadley, Sherwood T.; Wilson, Sara R.; Hubbs, Clay E.; Chamberlain, James P.; Chartrand, Ryan C.; Consiglio, Maria C.; Pa
关键词：	allocation；simulation；function；concept；human；compa；paris；loop；round；next
摘要：	Investigation of function allocation for the Next Generation Air Transportation System is being conducted by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). To provide insight on comparability of different function allocations for separation assurance, two human-in-the-loop simulation experiments were conducted on homogeneous airborne and ground-based approaches to four-dimensional trajectory-based operations, one referred to as ground-based automated separation assurance (groundbased) and the other as airborne trajectory management with self-separation (airborne). In the coordinated simulations at NASA s Ames and Langley Research Centers, controllers for the ground-based concept at Ames and pilots for the airborne concept at Langley managed the same traffic scenarios using the two different concepts. The common scenarios represented a significant increase in airspace demand over current operations. Using common independent variables, the simulations varied traffic density, scheduling constraints, and the timing of trajectory change events. Common metrics were collected to enable a comparison of relevant results. Where comparisons were possible, no substantial differences in performance or operator acceptability were observed. Mean schedule conformance and flight path deviation were considered adequate for both approaches. Conflict detection warning times and resolution times were mostly adequate, but certain conflict situations were detected too late to be resolved in a timely manner. This led to some situations in which safety was compromised and/or workload was rated as being unacceptable in both experiments. Operators acknowledged these issues in their responses and ratings but gave generally positive assessments of the respective concept and operations they experienced. Future studies will evaluate technical improvements and procedural enhancements to achieve the required level of safety and acceptability and will investigate the integration of airborne and ground-based capabilities within the same airspace to leverage the benefits of each concept.
报告类型：	科技报告