|
|
 |
A PROblem SITuation (PROSIT) either involved conflicting aircraft or aircraft which were legally separated but positioned such that a deviation would immediately cause a problem. A problem filtered view was obtained through highlighting the relevant subset of aircraft. |
|
|
The activity predictor identified the pending problems. |
|
|
The task sharing between controller teams was guided by the activity predictor. |
|
|
Anticipation is enhanced by the early highlighting of problems. |
|
|
|
|
The Co-operative Tools were based on ERATO developed by CENA and were used in the PHARE Demonstration 3 experiment.
The two high level functions of the Cooperative Tools were:
|
|
Interaction detection: checking aircraft against each other in a "controller like way" and qualifying the interactions between them. |
|
|
Problem detection: regroup these elementary interactions in sets of aircraft that can be handled as a consistent "Problem Situation" by the controller and time stamp it. |
|
|
|
|
The controllers’ HMI was fed by both processes, it produced either subsets of aircraft interfering with a given aircraft or sets of aircraft involved in the same conflict situation.
The Activity Predictor Display was fed by the problem detection process. The problems were given a name (which summarised them) and a time stamp (used by controller teams to organise their work).
|
|
|
|
Interaction detection detailed capabilities |
The first questions to be answered by the system were "could this aircraft become a matter of concern for the controller? If so, when, until when and why?” An aircraft is considered as preoccupying if it may interact with other aircraft.
It is considered that aircraft may "interact" in two ways:
|
|
at a given time, they may require additional attention because their trajectories are too close; |
|
|
one of them may be a constraint if the controller decides to change the trajectory of another (also called : "restricting" aircraft). |
|
|
|
|
To detect these interacting aircraft, the system has to perform the following functions:
|
|
assess the risk of interaction between two aircraft, through making a prediction of potential deviations and their probabilities; |
|
|
assess if an aircraft is restricting another one. |
|
|
|
|
Once interactions are detected, the system builds subsets of aircraft that can be handled as a whole by the controller.
|
|
associate more than two interacting aircraft creating a PROSIT. |
|
|
qualify each problem in order to make it explicit. |
|
|
|
|
The system has to present a list of problems that can be considered as a comprehensive view of the traffic situation. If the controller wishes to edit this view to change some of the subsets (add or remove an aircraft from a subset) or even to remove entire subsets, the system has to take these changes into account when it updates the situation.
The stages of Problem Detection are as follows:
|
|
Find the Interaction that is part of a PROSIT |
|
|
Give a name to a PROSIT |
|
|
Give an overall view of the situation |
|
|
Give the limit time of a PROSIT – after this time the problem will be more difficult to solve |
|
|
Identify the responsible control unit(s) (sectors) |
|
|
Ensure inter-sector consistency of PROSIT information |
|
|
Take controller's changes to the generic problem set into account |
|
|
|
|
The Co-operative Tools are documented in:
|
