Evaluation of an automated taxi concept
in a distributed simulation environment
Stephan Kocks
Astrid Oehme, Tobias Rad, Boris Budweg & Thomas Feuerle
EIWAC 2013 | Tokyo, Japan | 20th February 2013

Motivation
 Air traffic in Europe is expected to havedoubled within the next twenty years
 Major hub airports will become more and more
the bottlenecks in the air transport network
 Two million flights will not be accommodated
in 2030 Æ about 10% of the demand Bottlenecks
 Complex runway and taxiway layout
 Dependency on airfield view
 Spatial and environmental restrictions

 Countermeasures
 Change of current procedures
 Integration of new ATM concepts and technologies
EIWAC 2013 | Stephan Kocks | 20th February 2013 | Slide 2

ROLF Project Funded by the German Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology
 Sub-project of iPort (innovative Airport) within theGerman Aeronautical Research Program (LuFo IV) Duration
January 2009 - March 2012 (December 2012) Consortium Goal Increase resources and safety
 Reduce environmental pollution of ground traffic
 Reduce the dependency on direct vision of the airfield
EIWAC 2013 | Stephan Kocks | 20th February 2013 | Slide 3

Concept of Operations
 Objectives
 Introduction of an increased level of automation in ground traffic management
and visual guidance
 Submission of a complete and generic system concept

 Content
Detailed description of Systems and processes as well as theircorresponding interactions and information flows
 Concerned actors, their roles and responsibilities

 Ground and onboard systems
 Surface Management System (SMAN)
 Integrated Controller Working Position (ICWP) Airfield Ground Lighting (AGL) Cockpit Display System (CDS) Electronic Flight Bag (EFB)
EIWAC 2013 | Stephan Kocks | 20th February 2013 | Slide 4AGLCDSSMANICWPEFB

Ground Systems
 Surface Management System Central A-SMGCS platform Coordination of traffic on maneuvering area
 Automation services for surveillance, routing,guidance and control

 Integrated Controller Working Position
 Human-Machine Interface for ATC controller
 Position and relevant information of aircraft and vehicles
 Status of individual stop bars
 Operated via pen touch display

 Airfield Ground Lighting Unambiguous guidance for each flight Dynamically switches taxiway centerline lights
Æ Follow-the-greens Individual route segments are updated by SMANEIWAC 2013 | Stephan Kocks | 20th February 2013 | Slide 5

Onboard Systems – Cockpit Display System Integrated solution
 Represented by a Taxi GuidanceApplication
 Features
 High-resolution airport moving map
 Own-ship position and other traffic
 Routing functionality
Graphical and textual depiction ofassigned route and cleared segment
 Monitoring of route conformance Full support of data link communication
 Interactive text field for incoming messages
 Interactive menu for outgoing messages
 Interfaces to external systems (e.g. RMP) Touch screen interaction
EIWAC 2013 | Stephan Kocks | 20th February 2013 | Slide 6

Onboard Systems – Electronic Flight Bag
 External solution (Class 2 EFB)
 Respresented by Gate-To-Gate application
 General features Support in all phases of flight Concept of paperless cockpit regarding ofaeronautical information
 Touch screen interaction

 Taxi phase features

Jeppesen Proprietary High-resolution airport moving map
 Own-ship position and surrounding traffic
 Routing functionality
Graphical and textual depiction of overall route Limited data link functionality (reception ofroute messages only)
 JOBS tab for incoming messages

EIWAC 2013 | Stephan Kocks | 20th February 2013 | Slide 7

Procedures & Use Cases
 Each phase of the taxi process
defines a distinct use case

ProcedureUse case (inbound)
typeGeneral■Optional■■■■ Automation levels
 Semi-automated procedures- Cooperative/non-cooperative traffic- Controller is supported by SMAN but
responsible for action selection andexecution

 High-automated procedures

Final approach & landing ■ Clearance delivery & start-Up■ Taxi clearance■ Taxi clearance■ Taxiing■ Taxiing■ Handover■ Handover■ On-block■ Line-up sequencing■ Take-off
Taxiway sequencing
Hold & continue■ Route modification■ Runway crossing- Cooperative traffic only
Abnormal ■ Route deviation- General procedures and route assignments■ HPID1 overrun
are automatically processed via SMAN
■ RPID2 overrun■

 Communication

Use case (outbound)■DeadlockLanding conflict Aircraft is ‘equipped’ (full data link functionality)Æ Data link communication
 Aircraft is ‘not equipped’ (no or limited data link functionality)Æ Voice radio communication
EIWAC 2013 | Stephan Kocks | 20th February 2013 | Slide 8Taxiway Sequencing
Hold & continue■ Route modification■ Runway crossing■ Pushback■Route deviation
HPID1 overrun■ RPID2 overrun■ Deadlock■ Take-off conflict■

1 Holding Position Indication Device
2 Runway Protection Indication Device

Simulation Environment
Braunschweig

CockpitDarmstadt

CockpitFrankfurt

Cockpit

BerlinBraunschweig

FlightSimulator

OutsideView

CDS/EFB1

VoiceCom
ClientFrankfurt
Darmstadt
Nuremberg

Nuremberg

BerlinSMAN

Traffic
Simulator

Freiburg

Braunschweig

Data Link
Hardware[NordNordWest,
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/
File:Germany_location_map.svg]

VoiceCom
ServerFreiburg

ATC – ApronFreiburg

ATC – Tower
ICWP

OutsideView

VoiceCom
Client
1 CDS: Darmstadt & Frankfurt

EFB: Braunschweig

EIWAC 2013 | Stephan Kocks | 20th February 2013 | Slide 9

Simulation Environment

Cockpit simulator in
Braunschweig with integrated EFB

Cockpit simulator inFrankfurt with integrated CDS

EIWAC 2013 | Stephan Kocks | 20th February 2013 | Slide 10

Simulation Study Focus on semi-automated procedures from flight deck point of view High level objectives
 Safety
 Capacity & efficiency
 Usability & work performance Participants Eleven male airline pilots
 Five captains, two senior first officers
and three first officers (one not stated) Avg. flight experience: 5,063 h (300 h - 11,000 h)

 Scenarios & missions
 Four scenarios in total
 Eight missions per scenario (five inboundsand three outbounds) based on authentic
flight plan with dense traffic Predefined start and end points
EIWAC 2013 | Stephan Kocks | 20th February 2013 | Slide 11

Scenario

Visibility

Procedure

HighVisBase

10,000 m

Baseline1

LowVisBase

300 m

Baseline1

HighVisAuto

10,000 mSemi-automated2

LowVisAuto

300 m

Semi-automated2

1 No individual AGL,CDS/EFB with airport moving map
only & voice radio communication

2 Individual AGL (300 m segments), CDS/EFB with

depiction of other traffic and routes on airport moving
map & data link communication

Simulation Study Setting & procedure Scenarios were conducted at Frankfurt airport in a planned expansion stage for 2014
 Each cockpit simulator was manned with two pilots
 SMAN was operated by pseudo-controllers
 Three test days in total
 Three scenarios on one test dayF238V93Exemplary inbound mission:
RWY 25L to V93
Exemplary outbound mission:
F238 to RWY 25C25C25L[AIP Germany, DFS]EIWAC 2013 | Stephan Kocks | 20th February 2013 | Slide 12 Visibility only effected workload and awarenessof other traffic

HighResults
6HighVis
LowVis5

 Automated procedures were frequently rated
more advantageous than baseline procedures

Workload

432

Factor procedure

Perceived safety−∆Automation trust−n/aMental effort∆∆

Situational awareness■ Own-position■ Other traffic■ Unexpected events
Mental effort■ Maintain taxi speed■ Wait for clearance

−∆−−−

∆∆
−
∆ (tendency)∆∆ Effect− No effectn/a Not applicable

EIWAC 2013 | Stephan Kocks | 20th February 2013 | Slide 13

0Baseline

Automation

Average ratings for workload: interaction
between visibility and procedures
Always

Factor visibility

Never Situational awarenessObjective / theme

Low

1

65432
1

HighVis
LowVis0
Baseline

Automation

Average ratings for situational awareness:interaction between visibility and proceduresfor item I was aware of other traffic

Results
 Comments Positive ratings for onboard systems inbaseline and automated procedures
 Mostly positive feedback for CDS regarding
touch screen interaction and design Positive comments for AGL
 Critical statements regarding communication
between pilots and pseudo-controllers especiallyin baseline procedures
 Pilots were skeptic to rely on data linkcommunication only (Æ expected reduction
in situational awareness)“Moving map improves situational awarenesscompared to conventional charting.”“No. Everything is clearly allocated. It is kept
very simple. No complex submenus were used.”“With further integration of glass-cockpits
into the working environment it’s the bestsolution.”“Intuitive lighting guidance.”“Taxi clearance given (above moving map)
is too small and hard to read”“Controllers were not completely
used to standard phraseology”

 Suggestions for improvements ‘Hold short‘ and ‘give way to’ instructions should be transmitted and read back via voice radio Acoustic feedback when new/revised taxi clearance was received via data link More possibilities for requests in automated communication

EIWAC 2013 | Stephan Kocks | 20th February 2013 | Slide 14

Conclusion & Outlook
 Conclusion
 A concept of operations was introduced focusing on higher level of ground traffic
management and visual guidance A simulation study was conducted in a distributed simulation environment in order tovalidate certain aspects of the operational concept from flight deck perspective The distributed simulation was assed as feasible and sufficiently realistic for research
regarding operational procedures
 Semi-automated procedures were frequently rated more advantageous in terms ofperceived safety, workload and efficiency compared to baseline procedures
 Valuable feedback and suggestions for improvements regarding automated procedures
and design Positive effects in automated procedures may have been due to misunderstandings
between pilots and controllers in standard procedures

 Outlook Supplementary study with controllers or full study with operators from air and ground site
 Evaluation of the operational concept with high automated procedures
Æ Especially drawbacks of a high level of automation have to be thoroughly explored
EIWAC 2013 | Stephan Kocks | 20th February 2013 | Slide 15

Thank you!

Any questions?

Contact
Dipl.-Ing. Stephan Kocks
Institute of Flight GuidanceTechnische Universität Braunschweig
Phone: +49 531 3919857
E-Mail: s.kocks@tu-braunschweig.de
EIWAC 2013 | Stephan Kocks | 20th February 2013 | Slide 16