# Presentation: 606902

## Airport Traffic Control Tower Siting Criteria: Visibility Siting Analyses 

- Airport Traffic Control Tower Siting Criteria: Visibility Siting Analyses

- William “Kip” Krebs and Glen Hewitt
- ATO-P R&D Human Factors
- _[william.krebs@faa.gov](mailto:william.krebs@faa.gov)__ or __[glen.hewitt@faa.gov](mailto:glen.hewitt@faa.gov)_

## Acknowledgements

- Rodman Bourne
- Roger Bawgus
- Dave Cloutier
- Ronald Driggers
- Bernie Garbowski
- Rob Heckart
- William Kaplan
- Scott Iwamoto
- Steven Murrill
- Doug Norvell

- The valuable contributions supporting this effort from the following people are appreciated:

- Kathy Peterson
- William Vaughan
- Atlantic City ATCT Controllers
- Newark ATCT Controllers
- O’Hare ATCT Controllers
- Tulsa ATCT Controllers
- Las Vegas ATCT Controllers

## Visibility Siting Proposed Analyses:Tower Siting Order Inputs

**Object Distance and Discrimination:** ATCT distance from critical airport locations and ATCT height must support requirements for object visibility from the ATCT cab.  An Object Discrimination Analysis shall be performed to assess observers’ probability of detection and recognition of an object on the airport surface according to the criteria below

| Observation Capability Requirements  | Observation
Description  | Front View Probability
Criteria1 Minimum  |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Detection  | Ability to notice the presence of an object on the airport surface without regard to the class, type, or model (e.g., an object such as an aircraft or vehicle).  The observer knows something is present but cannot recognize or identify the object. | 

95.5% |
| Recognition  | Ability to discriminate a class of objects (e.g., a class of aircraft such as single engine general aviation aircraft). | 
11.5% |

## Visibility Siting Proposed Analyses:Tower Siting Order Inputs

**Line of Sight (LOS) Angle of Incidence:**  ATCT distance from critical airport locations and ATCT height must support requirements for viewing distant objects on the airport movement areas, taxiways, and non-movement areas from the ATCT cab.  A LOS Angle of Incidence Analysis shall be performed as described in Appendix 5, Section 2 to assess the angle at which the observers’ view of a distant object intersects with the airport surface in accordance with the criterion below:
**Two-Point Lateral Discrimination:** Critical points of the airport surface operations should be separated by sufficient distance to ensure that two objects at distant key locations provide the observer sufficient lateral discrimination.  The observer’s viewing angle between the two points should be laterally separated by 0.13 degrees (8 minutes) or greater.

| LOS Viewing Criteria  | LOS Viewing Angle of Incidence  |
| --- | --- |
| Minimum  | Equal to or greater than 0.80 degrees  |

## The Impact of ATC Tower Height on Visibility:A First-Order AnalysisSteven Murrill and Ronald Driggers (Army Research Laboratory - Adelphi, MD)

- The Impact of ATC Tower Height on Visibility:*A First-Order Analysis*Steven Murrill and Ronald Driggers (Army Research Laboratory - Adelphi, MD)

## Visibility Analysis Tool

- US Army developed a target acquisition sensor model to predict soldiers’ ability to correctly detect, recognize, and identify military targets.  The model is based on over 50 years of electro-optic sensor, human performance, and vision research.
- Human performance predictions are based on numerous human performance field and laboratory tests.

## Model AssumptionsArmy’s Target Acquisition Model can be found at http://www.hf.faa.gov/krebs/docs/ArmyTarget.pdf

**Detection:** Ability to notice the presence of an object on the airport surface without regard to the class, type, or model (e.g., an object such as an aircraft or vehicle).  The observer knows something is present but cannot recognize or identify the object.
**Recognition:** Ability to discriminate a class of objects (e.g., a class of aircraft such as single engine general aviation aircraft).
**Identification:** Ability to discriminate objects within a class (e.g., C-172)

## Model Assumptions

- Generate probability of discrimination curves using:
- Standard Target Transfer Probability Function (TTPF)**1**
-  Modified Johnson’s discrimination criteria
- Effective number of spatial cycles on target (aircraft) calculated by scaling the human eye’s Contrast Transfer Function**2** (CTFeye) by the atmospheric (optical) turbulence modulation transfer function**3** (MTFturb) at each range.
- A constant contrast transfer value for all ranges.
- Assess impact of tower height on visibility from the probability of discrimination curves.

**1** U.S. Army Night Vision Lab’s model
**2** Barton’s model
**3** Norm Kopeika’s turbulence model and the Tatarski height scaling model

## Visibility Analysis Tool

- Placed Model on Internet

- Tool can be found at _[http://www.hf.faa.gov/visibility](http://www.hf.faa.gov/visibility)__ _

## Impact on Current and Proposed Towers

- Object Discrimination

- Current Towers: provided by Tom Hilquest, Proposed Towers provided by AFTIL

- (probability of detecting a front-view dodge caravan)

## Line of Sight Angle of Incidence:Visual Perception StudyWilliam K. Krebs and Glen Hewitt(FAA ATO-P R&D Human Factors)

- Line of Sight Angle of Incidence:*Visual Perception Study*William K. Krebs and Glen Hewitt(FAA ATO-P R&D Human Factors)

## 11 male and 1 female tower airport traffic controller specialists (TUL, ORD, ACY, NEW) volunteered to participate in the LOS study.

Average age was 46.3 years with a standard deviation of 8.8.  Average operational airport tower experience was 17.4 years with a standard deviation of 9.3. 

Observers participation was approximately 1 hour in the AFTIL simulation cab. 

Observers signed informed consent.

- Average age was 46.3 years with a standard deviation of 8.8.  Average operational airport tower experience was 17.4 years with a standard deviation of 9.3.
- Observers participation was approximately 1 hour in the AFTIL simulation cab.
- Observers signed informed consent.

- Methods
- Participants

## Methods

- AFTIL Tower Cab

-   Observers performed common ATC visual tasks at different tower heights while positioned in a 3600 tower cab software simulation. Observers were positioned 23’ from the screen.
-   Realistic airport scenes were simulated using 1 (*need to verify*) meter resolution images.
-   Image generation was set at 64 pixels per inch on the screen which is equivalent to 20/40 visual acuity.
-   Key-points were located within 10,000’ of the observer to ensure maximum number of polygons assigned to each object.

## Methods

- Stimuli

| Airport Name | Key Point | Distance to Key Point (feet) | Tower Heights (feet)
values below were not corrected for key point elevation | Number of Observations Per Question Per Height |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| RIC | Rwy 34 Threshold | 9590 | 40, 94, 140, 186, 232, 277, 323, 369, 415, 461
39, 90, 100, 123, 143, 160, 170, 206, 290, 374 | 9
3 |
| MEM | Rwy 36R Threshold | 9809 | 119, 158, 197, 236, 275, 315, 354, 393, 432, 471
120, 140, 150, 179, 210, 265, 280, 307, 351, 436 | 9
3 |
| LGA | Rwy 31 Threshold | 4350 | 129, 130, 140, 160, 167, 205, 213, 243, 281, 319 | 3 |
| FWA | Rwy 05 Threshold | 8960 | 153, 175, 216, 240, 294, 372, 450, 529, 607, 686 | 3 |
| MMU | Rwy 23 Threshold | 4907 | 84, 108, 122, 151, 165, 194, 237, 280, 323, 366 | 3 |
| MSP | Rwy 30R Threshold | 9665 | 58, 103, 148, 193, 238, 284, 329, 374, 419, 464 | 9 |
| CPS | Rwy 30R Threshold | 7063 | 30, 64, 99, 133, 167, 202, 236, 270, 305, 339 | 9 |
| OSH-2 | Rwy 36 Threshold | 6550 | 45, 75, 105, 136, 166, 196, 226, 257, 287, 317 | 9 |

## Methods

- Procedure

- Each observer was exposed to five towers at ten different tower heights. Observer’s task was to visually scan a designated distant “key point” on the airport surface and rate his ability to (1) distinguish boundaries of the movement areas and (2) identify position of target at the airport’s key point.
- MD-80 was located on the key-point.
- Participants vocally responded using a 6-point Likert Scale.
- Airport towers were blocked and tower height was randomized for each subject.  To avoid order effects, each participant received a different order of airport towers and tower heights.

## Methods

- 6-Point Likert Scale

- Question 1: How well can you distinguish boundaries of the movement areas?

| 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Can not see runways or taxiways. | Can see target area. Can not discriminate boundaries of runways or taxiways. | Can discriminate boundaries of most of runways and taxiways; but provides no distance information. | Can discriminate boundaries of all runways and taxiways, but unable to estimate distances between movement areas. | Can discriminate boundaries of runways and taxiways, and provides some information about distances between movement areas. | Can discriminate boundaries of runways and taxiways, and can readily estimate distances between movement areas. |

- Question 2: How well can you identify position of target at the airport’s key point?

| 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Unable to determine any information about target’s position | Can see target object. Unable to determine any information about the target position relative to key point or movement areas. | Able to determine the general target position relative to key point, but unable to determine if target is on or off movement area. | Able to determine that target position is in general vicinity of key point, but unable to estimate distances of target within movement area. | Able to determine that target position is near key point, and provides some information about distances of target within movement area. | Able to determine the exact target position relative to key point.  Able to readily estimate distances of target within movement area. |

## LOS Angle of Incidence Study 

- Tower air traffic controllers response to the distant key point -  “Can discriminate boundaries of most of runways
- and taxiways; but provides no distance information.”
- Based on this response criteria, the minimum tower observation to key point line of sight angle should be **0.481.**

- LOS Angle of Incidence Study
- Question 1: How well can you distinguish boundaries of the movement areas?
- 6 point Likert Scale, TUL,ORD,ACY,NEW controllers (n=12), **Subject rating ****≥**** 2**

## LOS Angle of Incidence Study 

- LOS Angle of Incidence Study
- Question 2: How well can you identify position of target at the airport’s key point?
- 6 point Likert Scale, ORD,ACY,NEW controllers (n=9), **Subject rating ****≥**** 3**

- Tower air traffic controllers response to the distant key point -  “Able to determine that target position is in general vicinity of
- key point, but unable to estimate distances of target within movement area.”
- Based on this response criteria, the minimum tower observation to key point line of sight angle should be **0.799**.

## Line of Sight Angle of Incidence 

- Line of Sight Angle of Incidence
- Method and Results

- Question 1: How well can you distinguish boundaries of the movement areas?

| 0 | 1 | 2 =  (0.48 degrees) | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Can not see runways or taxiways. | Can see target area. Can not discriminate boundaries of runways or taxiways. | Can discriminate boundaries of most of runways and taxiways; but provides no distance information. | Can discriminate boundaries of all runways and taxiways, but unable to estimate distances between movement areas. | Can discriminate boundaries of runways and taxiways, and provides some information about distances between movement areas. | Can discriminate boundaries of runways and taxiways, and can readily estimate distances between movement areas. |

- Question 2: How well can you identify position of target at the airport’s key point?

| 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 =  (0.80 degrees) | 4 | 5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Unable to determine any information about target’s position | Can see target object. Unable to determine any information about the target position relative to key point or movement areas. | Able to determine the general target position relative to key point, but unable to determine if target is on or off movement area. | Able to determine that target position is in general vicinity of key point, but unable to estimate distances of target within movement area. | Able to determine that target position is near key point, and provides some information about distances of target within movement area. | Able to determine the exact target position relative to key point.  Able to readily estimate distances of target within movement area. |

**Line of Sight Angle of Incidence Criterion established at 0.80 degrees**

## Impact on Current and Proposed Towers 

- Impact on Current and Proposed Towers
- Line of Sight Angle of Incidence

- Current Towers: provided by Tom Hilquest, Proposed Towers provided by AFTIL

## Impact on Current and Proposed Towers 

- Impact on Current and Proposed Towers
- Line of Sight Angle of Incidence

- Current Towers: provided by Tom Hilquest, Proposed Towers provided by AFTIL

## Two-Point Discrimination

- Purpose: Quantify the impact of tower location on observers’ ability to discriminate two distinctly spatially separate points on the airport surface.
- Criterion: 8 minutes

- Calculate angle

## Backup Slides

## LOS Angle of Incidence Study 

- Tower air traffic controllers response to the distant key point -  “Can discriminate boundaries of all runways and taxiways,
- but unable to estimate distances between movement areas.”
- Based on this response criteria, the minimum tower observation to key point line of sight angle should be **1.067**.

- LOS Angle of Incidence Study
- Question 1: How well can you distinguish boundaries of the movement areas?
- 6 point Likert Scale, TUL, ORD,ACY,NEW controllers (n=12), **Subject rating ****≥**** 3**

## LOS Angle of Incidence Study 

- Tower air traffic controllers response to the distant key point -  “Can discriminate boundaries of runways and taxiways, and
- provides some information about distances between movement areas.”
- Based on this response criteria, the minimum tower observation to key point line of sight angle should be **1.428**.

- LOS Angle of Incidence Study
- Question 1: How well can you distinguish boundaries of the movement areas?
- 6 point Likert Scale, TUL,ORD,ACY,NEW controllers (n=12), **Subject rating ****≥**** 4**

## LOS Angle of Incidence Study 

- Tower air traffic controllers response to the distant key point -  “Can discriminate boundaries of runways and taxiways,
- and can readily estimate distances between movement areas.”
- Based on this response criteria, the minimum tower observation to key point line of sight angle should be **2.177**.

- LOS Angle of Incidence Study
- Question 1: How well can you distinguish boundaries of the movement areas?
- 6 point Likert Scale, TUL,ORD,ACY,NEW controllers (n=12), **Subject rating ****=**** 5**

## LOS Angle of Incidence Study 

- LOS Angle of Incidence Study
- Question 2: How well can you identify position of target at the airport’s key point?
- 6 point Likert Scale, ORD,ACY,NEW controllers (n=9), **Subject rating ****≥**** 2**

- Tower air traffic controllers response to the distant key point -  “Able to determine the general target position relative to key
- point, but unable to determine if target is on or off movement area.”
- Based on this response criteria, the minimum tower observation to key point line of sight angle should be.

## LOS Angle of Incidence Study 

- LOS Angle of Incidence Study
- Question 2: How well can you identify position of target at the airport’s key point?
- 6 point Likert Scale, ORD,ACY,NEW controllers (n=9), **Subject rating ****≥**** 4**

- Tower air traffic controllers response to the distant key point -  “Able to determine that target position is near key point, and
- provides some information about distances of target within movement area.”
- Based on this response criteria, the minimum tower observation to key point line of sight angle should be **2.177**.

## LOS Angle of Incidence Study 

- LOS Angle of Incidence Study
- Question 2: How well can you identify position of target at the airport’s key point?
- 6 point Likert Scale, ORD,ACY,NEW controllers (n=9), **Subject rating = 5**

- Tower air traffic controllers response to the distant key point -  “Able to determine the exact target position relative to key
- point.  Able to readily estimate distances of target within movement area.”
- Based on this response criteria, the minimum tower observation to key point line of sight angle should be **2.187**.