Pilot Compliance to TCAS Resolution Advisories

Authors: Amy R. Pritchett , Scottie-Beth FlemingPresented by: Rachel A. Haga

Cognitive Engineering Center, Georgia Tech

32nd DASC , Oct. 9, 2013

Pilot Compliance to TCAS Resolution Advisories

Work sponsored by the FAA, Tom McCloy as Technical Monitor

2

Outline

Background & Motivation

Experimental Setup

Observed Pilot Compliance

Potential Interventions

Conclusions

3

ConclusionsPotential InterventionsPilot ComplianceExperimental SetupMotivation & Background

Traffic alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS)

o TCAS delivers a two stage advisory and vertical avoidance maneuvero Traffic Advisory (TA) - ‘Traffic Traffic’o Resolution Advisory (RA) - ‘Climb Climb’

o Pilot is to follow an RA, even if it conflicts with ATC instructions, unless the pilot believes that safe flight would be jeopardized

Federal Aviation Administration (2000). Introduction to TCAS II Version 7. Washington, D.C.

Traffic Situation Display Vertical Speed Indicator with Climb RA

4

Motivation & PurposeConclusionsPotential InterventionsPilot ComplianceExperimental SetupMotivation & Background

For The ExperimentsMotivation: TOPA observed compliance rates of 41% to Climb RA’s and 59% to Descend RA’sPurpose: Study contributing factors and potential solutions to inform future FAA regulation

For This WorkMotivation: Have concluded four studies

Purpose: Condensing the message into the essential ‘So What?’

Olson, W. and J. Olszta (2010). TCAS Operational Performance Assessment in the U.S. National Airspace. IEEE/AIAA Digital Avionics Systems Conference.

Olszta, J., & Olson, W. (2011). Characterization and Analysis of Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance Resolution Advisories Resulting for 500' and 1,000' Vertical Separation. Paper presented at the Ninth USA/Europe Air Traffic Management Research and Development Seminar (ATM 2011), Berlin, Germany.

The Experiment Setup

6

ConclusionsPotential InterventionsPilot ComplianceMotivation & Background Experimental Setup

Participantso Active air transport or regional pilotso Received TCAS training according to FAA training standardso 12 – 18 pilots per study

Traffic eventso Advisory type and aircraft trajectory

o TA, Climb RA, Descend RA, Crossing Descend RAo RA caused by VFR Traffic

o ATC information o Traffic Callout, Party-line Information, Conflicting ATC/TCAS Guidance

o Traffic density o Heavy and Light

Overview of Study

7


Air Traffic Transcripts

Charts & Checklists

Audio Communications (Aviation Intercom)

TCAS Alerts

Simulation Architecture

Eyetracker

PartyLine First Officer

Captain

Experimenter/Instructor

B747-400 Simulator (RFS)

TSDPFD

ND

PFDN

D

Touchscree

n

SideStick

ATC->TSDVGA

ATC Air Traffic Sim

ulator (TGF)

TCAS Logic

Simulator Study in Integrated Flightdeck – ATC Environment

Pritchett, A., Fleming, E., Cleveland, W., Zoetrum, J., Popescu, V., & Thakkar, D. (2012). Pilot Interaction with TCAS and Air Traffic Control. Paper presented at the 2nd International Conference on Application and Theory of Automation in Command and Control Systems (ATACCS), London.

Pilot Compliance

9


Definition of ComplianceVe

rtica

l Spe

ed

Not in Compliance In Compliance

time5 secondsRA

Climb

2 ½ secTCAS weakens

required vertical rate

TCAS assumed

¼ g pull-up

Clear of Conflict

TCAS assumed constant vertical

RA rate

10 seconds 15 seconds

TCAS RA ManeuverPilot’s Response

Fully Complied?

No

Percentage Compliance

60%

10

ConclusionsPotential InterventionsMotivation & Background

Overall Compliance RateExperimental Setup Pilot Compliance

68% fully complied with

TCAS RAs

On average complied for

96.6% duration of a RA

11


How are pilot’s not complying?Experimental Setup Pilot Compliance

Time to disconnectMean time to disengage: 2.14 s

No trend among outliers

Tracking vertical speed

No buffer = 62% compliance3 fps buffer = 68% compliance6% increase

Time when pilot first achieved vertical rate

12


Operational Factors Impacting ComplianceExperimental Setup Pilot Compliance

RA Type

ATC Communication

Traffic Density

Traffic Events

Potential Interventions

1. Traffic Situation Displays2. Additional Training3. Automatic RA

14

ConclusionsMotivation & Background Experimental Setup Pilot Compliance Potential Interventions

Traffic Situation Displays: Current

Traffic Advisory

“Traffic Traffic”

Resolution Advisory

“Climb Climb”

15


Traffic Situation Displays: TSD+

TSD+ Layout and Symbology

16


Traffic Situation Displays: VSD

VSD Layout and Symbology

17


Traffic Situation Displays

No significant impact on

compliance

18


Ground and Simulation Training

Demonstration Based Training Event Based Training

Approach to Training Design

Complement of Two Methods

+ Computer-Based Training Introduction to TCAS Traffic Situation Display TCAS Advising Logic Traffic Advisories Resolution Advisories Example Timeline of RA Evolution

+ Mid-Training Quizzes

+ Presents traffic events that create the requirement to act

+ Builds context and complexity into each scenario as the flight progresses

+ Uses a more realistic training environment

19


Ground and Simulation Training

20


Automatic Resolution Advisory Response

Pilots left autopilot engaged for 83% (53 of 64 RAs) of the runs

Disengaged generally for Crossing Climb RA

Conclusions

22

• Motivation

• Pilot compliance to TCAS is low

• Pilot Compliance

• In compliance for 96.6% of the duration of the RA, on average

• Fully complied for 68% of the runs

• Potential Interventions

• Changes to TSD had no significant impact

• Training program was effective

• Auto RA increased full compliance but greatly decreases percentage compliance for crossing climb

Motivation & Background Experimental Setup Pilot Compliance Potential Interventions Conclusions

Conclusions

Questions?

Pilot Compliance to TCAS Resolution Advisories

Documents

Transcript of Pilot Compliance to TCAS Resolution Advisories