Use of traffic displays for general aviation approach spacing : a human factors study

Details

• Creators:
  Nadler, Eric ; Yost, A. ; Kendra, A. J.
• Corporate Creators:
  John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center (U.S.)
• Subject/TRT Terms:
  • Information display systems
  • Air traffic control
  • ADS-B Displays
  • CDTI Displays
  • Navigation Displays
  • Human Factors
  • Psychology
  • Applied Psychology
• Publication/ Report Number:
  DOT/FAA/AM-07/30
• Resource Type:
  Research Paper
• Geographical Coverage:
  United States
• Corporate Publisher:
  United States. Office of Aerospace Medicine
• Abstract:
  A flight experiment was conducted to assess human factors issues associated with pilot use of traffic displays for approach ; spacing. Sixteen multi-engine rated pilots participated. Eight flew approaches in a twin-engine Piper Aztec originating in ; Sanford, ME, and eight flew approaches in the same aircraft originating in Atlantic City, NJ. The spacing target was a ; Cessna 206. The traffic display was either a Garmin International MX-20™ (the “Basic” Cockpit Display of Traffic ; Information, or CDTI) or an MX-20™ modified with features to help the pilot monitor the closing rate, the range and ; ground speed of the traffic-to-follow, and ownship ground speed (Range Monitor). Two other Equipment conditions were ; Baseline and Autopilot. Pilots successfully used the displays to maintain the assigned spacing on visual and instrument ; approaches. The spacing deviations were significantly lower when using the displays during visual approaches than when ; attempting to maintain spacing without a traffic display. The mean spacing deviation during the IFR approaches was less ; than 0.10 NM for all three equipment conditions (Basic CDTI, Range Monitor, Autopilot), and these mean spacing ; deviations did not differ significantly. Range Monitor features appeared to particularly benefit the low-hour pilots. While ; the traffic display reduced visual reacquisition times, this effect was only found with pilots whose displays showed additional ; traffic (not only the traffic-to-follow). In general, however, the additional traffic was associated with less time between ; fixations on the display and higher workload. Subjects appeared to have had difficulty identifying an optimal display range ; that would simultaneously provide traffic awareness and spacing task performance. The traffic display necessarily requires ; visual attention and reduces the attention available for scanning the instrument panel and on visual approaches, the outside ; world. For this reason, even if pilots assume responsibility for spacing when they temporarily lose visual contact with the ; assigned traffic-to-follow, they should notify ATC of the loss of visual contact so that controllers can assume responsibility ; for separation from other aircraft.
  More +
• Format:
  PDF
• Download URL:
  https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/9018/dot_9018_DS1.pdf
• File Type:
  [PDF - 1.55 MB]
• Collection(s):
  Volpe Center ; FAA Civil Aerospace Medical Institute
• Main Document Checksum:
  urn:sha-512:f95c179e43edc0780e8b3f6b8c6cbcd3e214a9efecb4188d696b5bf7bd5db272ccdc1dd05b6903f374919a3de8d10e65607bcb09db2dda6688d0e865049d3983