• DocumentCode
    2567685
  • Title

    The use and understanding of the proximate status indication in traffic displays

  • Author

    Zuschlag, Michael ; Chandra, Divya ; Grayhem, Rebecca

  • Author_Institution
    Volpe Nat. Transp. Syst. Center, Cambridge, MA, USA
  • fYear
    2011
  • fDate
    16-20 Oct. 2011
  • Abstract
    Traffic Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) traffic displays use symbol fill to distinguish "proximate" from "non-proximate" targets, where proximate targets are within a specified range and altitude of ownship, and non-proximate targets are outside these parameters. While this is satisfactory for TCAS displays, Cockpit Displays of Traffic Information (CDTI) can present much more information than TCAS displays, and an alternative use of symbol fill may be preferred. Since a symbol for traffic has a limited number of visual features for encoding information, CDTI symbology should only encode information that can be used effectively by pilots. This study evaluated the utility of the proximate status indication in an effort to understand whether it is useful enough to show on CDTIs. One hundred and one corporate and airline pilots were recruited for the web-based study via advertisements in on-line pilot newsletters. Pilots viewed videos of traffic scenarios depicted on a traffic display. Half the pilots were shown displays with a proximate status indication, and half the subjects were shown displays without a proximate status indication. Results showed that the proximate status indication did not improve consistency of pilot ratings relative to objective measures of threat and visibility. Furthermore, pilots who had the proximate status indication were 9% less accurate on average in selecting the highest threat traffic, whether the most threatening traffic was proximate or not. Pilots also answered questions about the proximate indication status in TCAS. Most pilots reported they found it useful, usually for prioritizing their attention. Most pilots recognized that a proximate symbol must be within a specific range and altitude, but nearly equal proportions of pilots also believed proximate traffic must always be a higher threat than non-proximate traffic, which is not the case. The combined results suggest that when assessing traffic threat, pilots place greater weigh- on the closeness of traffic than other key characteristics such as relative closing speed.
  • Keywords
    aircraft computers; aircraft displays; collision avoidance; traffic engineering computing; CDTI; TCAS traffic displays; Web-based study; airline pilots; cockpit display of traffic information; encoding information; nonproximate targets; nonproximate traffic; on-line pilot newsletters; proximate status indication; traffic collision avoidance system traffic displays; Air traffic control; Aircraft; Clutter; Encoding; Radar; Videos; Visualization;
  • fLanguage
    English
  • Publisher
    ieee
  • Conference_Titel
    Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC), 2011 IEEE/AIAA 30th
  • Conference_Location
    Seattle, WA
  • ISSN
    2155-7195
  • Print_ISBN
    978-1-61284-797-9
  • Type

    conf

  • DOI
    10.1109/DASC.2011.6096095
  • Filename
    6096095