Analyzing Critical Pair Identification as a Human Controlled Function in Air Traffic Control

Caitlin Anne Surakitbanharn, Purdue University

Abstract

Automated separation assurance appears to be a necessary component in NextGen air traffic control (ATC) system efforts. However, no human-managed, safety-critical function has been identified in order to maintain prescribed levels of system safety. Critical pair identification (CPI) is a possible solution that allows human controls to manage risk mitigation amongst aircraft pairs while automation handles routine separation. This work has evaluated if controllers manage critical pairs in their current operations, as well as what characteristics of air traffic motivate controllers to apply control, even with a loss of separation (LOS) is not predicted or eminent. Additionally, this work has evaluated safety and risk culture differences amongst air traffic controllers of three different country origins (Australia, Thailand, United States) to determine if any differences exist, and to determine if different countries use or manage risk mitigation differently. These efforts were evaluated with real air traffic controllers (n=43) participating in air traffic control simulations where they indicated when and how traffic would be controlled. Safety and risk culture was measured using a safety culture questionnaire designed by EUROCONTROL to determine a safety culture score. This research found that controllers do control critical pairs with consistency (64.44% of all controls applied were on critical pairs). However, it was found that 99.58% of those critical pairs controlled had at least one other characteristic (converging paths, passing, closest approach less than eight nautical miles, vertical separation less than 1000 feet). It was also found that the most controlled aircraft pairs were those that had a closet approach of less than eight nautical miles and a vertical separation of less than 1000 feet, but no critical pair property and no LOS. This indicates that controllers may be controlling aircraft pairs that do not need control, as no near-mid-air collision or LOS is feasible. However, pairs with these properties and the critical pair property could be given to controllers in an automated environment to manage for risk mitigation. It was also found that controllers have no meaningful difference in their safety and risk cultures, regardless of country of origin. Their management of critical pairs and risk mitigation also does not differ amongst countries of origin. This indicates that controllers have a similar professional culture and perform their duties in a similar manner. When designing future ATC systems, this culture can be accounted for to produce highly functional and accepted new technologies.

Degree

Ph.D.

Advisors

Neal, Purdue University.

Subject Area

Industrial engineering

Off-Campus Purdue Users:
To access this dissertation, please log in to our
proxy server
.

Share

COinS