Visual Features Involving Motion Seen from Airport Control Towers

Abstract

Visual motion cues are used by tower controllers to support both visual and anticipated separation. Some of these cues are tabulated as part of the overall set of visual features used in towers to separate aircraft. An initial analyses of one motion cue, landing deceleration, is provided as a basis for evaluating how controllers detect and use it for spacing aircraft on or near the surface. Understanding cues like it will help determine if they can be safely used in a remote/virtual tower in which their presentation may be visually degraded.

Videopanorama Frame Rate Requirements Derived from Visual Discrimination of Deceleration During Simulated Aircraft Landing

“…It is clear from controller interviews that numerous out-of-windows visual features are used for control purposes (Ellis and Liston 2010;Van Schaik et al 2010; Ellis and Liston 2011) (see also chapters "Visual Features Used by Airport Tower Controllers: Some Implications for the Design of Remote or Virtual Towers" and "Detection and Recognition for Remote Tower Operations"), which in fact go beyond those required for aircraft detection, recognition, and identification (Watson et al 2009). In the present work, for analyzing frame rate effects on prediction errors we focused on the landing phase of aircraft because we expected any perceptual degradation to be most pronounced in this highly dynamic situation.…”

“…Controllers could visually supervise aircraft from remote locations by videolinks, allowing them to monitor many airports from a central point (Schmidt et al 2007;Hannon et al 2008;Fürstenau et al 2009;SESAR-Ju Project 06.09.03;van Scheijk et al 2010). While many current towers on A-SMGCS-equipped airports, even some at busy airports like London-Heathrow, can continue to operate totally without controllers ever seeing controlled aircraft under contingency conditions, although with reduced capacity, it is clear from controller interviews that usually numerous out-the-window visual features are used for control purposes (Ellis and Liston 2010;Van Schaik et al 2010;Ellis and Liston 2011). In fact, these visual features go beyond those required for aircraft detection, recognition, and identification (Watson et al 2009).…”

How to Evaluate Remote Tower Metrics in Connection With Weather Observations

“…The earliest approaches for defining RTO requirements concentrated on visual perception (Ellis & Liston, 2008;Hannon et al, 2008). Friedrich (2016) describes the process of RTM identification as refinement and consolidation of the functional requirements of a CWP-remote and in cooperation with ATCOs who serve as subject matter experts.…”

Frame Rate Effects on Visual Discrimination of Landing Aircraft Deceleration: Implications for Virtual Tower Design and Speed Perception

“…Accordingly, the need to build new or maintain old towers can be removed (Hadden, Lee, Geyer, Sheridan, Francis,Woods, Malonson, 2008)). While many current towers, even some at busy airports like San Francisco, can continue to operate totally without controller visual contact with controlled aircraft, it is clear from controller interviews that numerous outthe-window visual features are used for control purposes (Ellis & Liston, 2010;Van Schaik, Lindqvist & Roessingh, 2010;Ellis & Liston, 2011). In fact, these visual features go beyond those required by the FAA which typically only include those related to aircraft detection, recognition, and identification.…”