![]() ![]() It was learnt that human controllers use rules of thumb plus years of expertise and thus act in a very standardized way. ![]() The model currently performs a linear prediction of aircrafts’ future locations based on current speed (local timelines). The main focus of our expert interview was to determine how controllers assess situations and derive a plan. ![]() Prior to issuing the advisory, the approach controller (software agent and human alike) has performed spatial planning in order to determine the right time to advise the change of heading and speed. 3 shows a traffic situation from simulation where the approach control agent has just opted for issuing a direct- to-downwind in order to build up an arrival queue (the affected aircraft are highlighted with red circles). Since readily available, we later include latencies for speed and altitude settings as well. We concentrate on the times needed for implementing ‘ vector ’ and ‘ direct ’ advisories in the aircraft’s control computers. 2 The operational effects of the flight deck latencies are best discussed on exemplary traffic situations. The speed selector panel of the FCU is visible on the very left of fig. was positively verified that the tasks for implementing speed and altitude changes are identical to implementing a ‘ vector ’ advisory (i.e.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |