The Future Oceanic ATC Environment: Analysis of Mixed Communication, Navigation, and Surveillance Equipage

Abstract

Technical capabilities for significant improvements in communication, navigation, and surveillance (CNS) over the oceans are currently available through the use of satellites. However, all aircraft operators will not equip simultaneously because of the high costs required. Consequently, as these CNS systems are integrated into the oceanic air transportation architecture, the controller will have to manage a mixed equipage fleet. Also, planned reductions in separation minima are based on aircraft equipage, therefore oceanic controllers will need to apply a set of mixed separation standards. The cognitive effects of the mixed equipage environment were studied through field observations and experimental analysis. The results confirm that methods are needed to minimize human performance issues with integrating mixed CNS equipage, and ensure safety and efficiency in the mixed equipage environment.

Feasibility of Integrating Automated Separation Assurance with Controller-Managed Aircraft Operations in the Same Airspace

“…Equipped aircraft in the study were outfitted with the Future Air Navigation System (FANS-1A) avionics package and datalink. The study found the 50% equipage scenario had the most reports of difficulty and loss of situation awareness [Forest and Hansman, 2006]. Based on these results, the authors recommend further exploring airspace segregation as a means of reducing the complexity of the mixed equipage environment.…”

“…Simpler assumptions about the airspace should result in fewer complications during offnominal events, and reduce controller workload and confusion during normal operations. Forest and Hansman suggest that, as a side benefit, efficient segregated airspace could also encourage users to invest in advanced equipage [Forest and Hansman, 2006]. However, segregated airspace could come at a significant cost in underutilized airspace capacity and in reduced user flexibility because such partitioning, by definition, limits access to all users.…”

“…Prior literature on mixed equipage or mixed operations airspace (involving advanced separation concepts, different Required Navigation Performance (RNP) mixes, and different surveillance methods) has not conclusively addressed the issue at hand: the feasibility of integrating automated separation assurance with controller managed aircraft operations in the same airspace. [Corker et al, 2000;Doble et al, 2005;Pina and Hansman, 2004;Forest and Hansman, 2006;Hoekstra et al, 2000;Kopardekar et al, 2008;and Lee et al, 2005]. Furthermore, these studies did not address the implications of mixed operations on airspace configuration.…”

Human-In-the-Loop Evaluation of NextGen Concepts in the Airspace Operations Laboratory

“…Therefore, research into the feasibility of integrated airspace is warranted to determine whether aircraft with different levels of equipage can co-exist in the same airspace and under what conditions this may be possible 31 . Prior literature on mixed equipage or mixed operations airspace has shown initial feasibility in some studies 33,34 and uncovered feasibility issues in others 35,36 . A study was conducted in 2008 to examine the implications of mixed equipage on airspace configuration requirements for advanced separation assurance operations, particularly under higher traffic densities.…”