Go to the NASA Homepage
Search >
Click to Search
Human Systems Integration Division homepageHuman Systems Integration Division homepage Organization pageOrganization page Technical Areas pageTechnical Areas page Outreach and Publications pageOutreach and Publications page Contact pageContact page
Human Systems Integration Division Homepage
Outreach & Publications Sidebar Header
Go to the Outreach & Publications pageGo to the Outreach & Publications page
Go to Awards pageGo to Awards page
Go to News pageGo to News page
Go to Factsheets pageGo to Factsheets page
Go to Multimedia pageGo to Multimedia page
Go to Human Factors 101 pageGo to Human Factors 101 page
What is Human System Integration? Website
Publication Header
An Evaluation of controller and pilot performance, workload, and acceptability under a nextgen concept for dynamic weather adapted arrival routing  (2012)
Abstract Header
In today's terminal operations, controller workload increases and throughput decreases when fixed standard terminal arrival routes (STARs) are impacted by storms. To circumvent this operational constraint, Krozel, Penny, Prete, and Mitchell (2004) proposed to use automation to dynamically adapt arrival and departure routing based on weather predictions. The present study examined this proposal in the context of a NextGen trajectory-based operation concept, focusing on the acceptability of this proposal to both pilots and controllers, as well as its effect on the controllers' ability to manage traffic flows.

Six controllers and twelve transport pilots participated in a human-in-the-loop simulation of arrival operations into Louisville International Airport with interval management requirements. Three types of routing structures were used: Static STARs (similar to current routing, which require the trajectories of individual aircraft to be modified to avoid the weather), Dynamic routing (automated adaptive routing around weather), and Dynamic Adjusted routing (automated adaptive routing around weather with aircraft entry time adjusted to account for differences in route length). Spacing Responsibility, whether responsibility for interval management resided with the controllers (as today), or resided with the pilot (who used a flight deck based automated spacing algorithm), was also manipulated. We collected subjective workload and acceptability ratings at the end of each trial. Participants also provided additional ratings and comments in a debrief questionnaire administered at the end of the simulation. Task decisions and behaviors as well as verbal communications were also recorded.

Dynamic routing as a whole was rated superior to static routing, especially by pilots, both in terms of workload reduction and flight path safety. Controllers also expressed a clear preference for dynamic routing. However, a downside of using dynamic routing was that the paths flown in the dynamic conditions tended to be somewhat longer than the paths flown in the static condition.
Private Investigators Header
Authors Header
Groups Header
Keywords Header
acceptability, adapted, arrival, concept, controller, dynamic, Evaluation, nextgen, performance, pilot, routing, weather, workload
References Header
Download Header
Adobe PDF Icon  Johnson_EAAP.pdf (Download Acrobat Reader Click to download Adobe Acrabat Reader)
  (1056KB) (application/pdf)
Go to the First Gov Homepage
Go to the NASA - National Aeronautics and Space Administration Homepage
Curator: Phil So
NASA Official: Alonso Vera
Last Updated: August 15, 2019