SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Automated Air Traffic Management”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 289 records · Page 16

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2016

Airspace Technology Demonstration 3 (ATD-3): Dynamic Weather Routes (DWR) Technology Transfer Document Summary Version 1.0

Airspace Technology Demonstration #3 (ATD-3) is part of NASA's Airspace Operations and Safety Program (AOSP) - specifically, its Airspace Technology Demonstrations (ATD) Project. ATD-3 is a multiyear research and development effort which proposes to develop and demonstrate automation technologies and operating concepts that enable air navigation service providers and airspace users to continuously assess weather, winds, traffic, and other information to identify, evaluate, and implement workable opportunities for flight plan route corrections that can result in significant flight time and fuel savings in en route airspace. In order to ensure that the products of this tech-transfer are relevant and useful, NASA has created strong partnerships with the FAA and key industry stakeholders. This summary document and accompanying technology artifacts satisfy the first of three Research Transition Products (RTPs) defined in the Applied Traffic Flow Management (ATFM) Research Transition Team (RTT) Plan. This transfer consists of NASA's legacy Dynamic Weather Routes (DWR) work for efficient routing for en-route weather avoidance. DWR is a ground-based trajectory automation system that continuously and automatically analyzes active airborne aircraft in en route airspace to identify opportunities for simple corrections to flight plan routes that can save significant flying time, at least five minutes wind-corrected, while avoiding weather and considering traffic conflicts, airspace sector congestion, special use airspace, and FAA routing restrictions. The key benefit of the DWR concept is to let automation continuously and automatically analyze active flights to find those where simple route corrections can save significant time and fuel. Operators are busy during weather events. It is more effective to let automation find the opportunities for high-value route corrections.

ATD-3↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

ACAS Xr Part Task Sim, Preliminary Experiment Design

In early 2022, the Human Autonomy Teaming Lab (NASA Ames Research Center) will conduct a manned, human-in-the-loop (HITL) simulation. This part task HITL will begin the lab’s Hazard Perception and Avoidance (HPA) technical work under NASA’s Advanced Air Mobility (AAM), Automated Flight and Contingency Management (AFCM) Sub-Project. The goals will be to assess levels of automation for manned, electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft. This simulation will test manual and automated Resolution Advisory (RA) responses and return-to-course (RTC) maneuvers for the first version of the Airborne Collision Avoidance System’s (ACAS) rotary-wing (Xr) variant. This will be conducted on a fixed-based simulator designed to fly eVTOL aircraft while maneuvering for intruding traffic. Variables for this study include levels of autonomy (i.e., manual and automated) as well as the types of alerts at the onset of conflicts (i.e., Corrective and RA). The data collected will include response times, losses of well clear, and maneuver sizes and durations as well as subjective ratings like acceptability, perceived workload, and meaningful human control. Additional details and future anticipations are also discussed.

air taxis↗

NASA NTRS2009

Benefits Assessment of Algorithmically Combining Generic High Altitude Airspace Sectors

In today's air traffic control operations, sectors that have traffic demand below capacity are combined so that fewer controller teams are required to manage air traffic. Controllers in current operations are certified to control a group of six to eight sectors, known as an area of specialization. Sector combinations are restricted to occur within areas of specialization. Since there are few sector combination possibilities in each area of specialization, human supervisors can effectively make sector combination decisions. In the future, automation and procedures will allow any appropriately trained controller to control any of a large set of generic sectors. The primary benefit of this will be increased controller staffing flexibility. Generic sectors will also allow more options for combining sectors, making sector combination decisions difficult for human supervisors. A sector-combining algorithm can assist supervisors as they make generic sector combination decisions. A heuristic algorithm for combining under-utilized air space sectors to conserve air traffic control resources has been described and analyzed. Analysis of the algorithm and comparisons with operational sector combinations indicate that this algorithm could more efficiently utilize air traffic control resources than current sector combinations. This paper investigates the benefits of using the sector-combining algorithm proposed in previous research to combine high altitude generic airspace sectors. Simulations are conducted in which all the high altitude sectors in a center are allowed to combine, as will be possible in generic high altitude airspace. Furthermore, the algorithm is adjusted to use a version of the simplified dynamic density (SDD) workload metric that has been modified to account for workload reductions due to automatic handoffs and Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast (ADS-B). This modified metric is referred to here as future simplified dynamic density (FSDD). Finally, traffic demand sets with increased air traffic demand are used in the simulations to capture the expected growth in air traffic demand by the mid-term.

Bloem, Michael↗

NASA NTRS2019

Advancing Aircraft Operations in a Net-Centric Environment with the Incorporation of Increasingly Autonomous Systems and Human Teaming

NextGen has begun the modernization of the nation’s air transportation system, with goals to improve system safety, increase operation efficiency and capacity, provide enhanced predictability, resilience and robustness. With these improvements, NextGen is poised to handle significant increases in air traffic operations, more than twice the number recorded in 2016, by 2025.1 NextGen is evolving toward collaborative decision-making across many agents, including automation, by use of a Net-Centric architecture, which in itself creates a very complex environment in which the navigation and operation of aircraft are to take place. An intricate environment such as this, coupled with the expected upsurge of air traffic operations generates concern respecting the ability of the human-agent to both fly and manage aircraft within. Therefore, it is both necessary and practical to begin the process of increasingly autonomous systems within the cockpit that will act independently to assist the human-agent achieve the overall goal of NextGen. However, the straightforward technological development and implementation of intelligent machines into the cockpit is only part of what is necessary to maintain, at minimum, or improve human-agent functionality, as desired, while operating in NextGen. The full integration of Increasingly Autonomous Systems (IAS) within the cockpit can only be accomplished when the IAS works in concert with the human, formulating trust between the two, thereby establishing a team atmosphere. Imperative to cockpit implementation is ensuring the proper performance of the IAS by the development team and the human-agent with which it will be paired when given a specific piloting, navigation, or observational task. Described in this paper are the steps taken, at NASA Langley Research Center, during the second and third phases of the development of an IAS, the Traffic Data Manager (TDM), its verification and validation by human-agents, and the foundational development of Human Autonomy Teaming (HAT) between the two.

Houston, Vincent E.↗

NASA NTRS2022

PAAV Concept Document

The Pathfinding for Airspace with Autonomous Vehicles (PAAV) Concept Document, version 1.0, lays out the key challenges and potential solutions for the use of uncrewed aircraft (UA) technology for future regional air cargo operations. The challenges and solutions described in this document were informed by communications with the UA industry community (e.g., RTCA, the Federal Aviation Administration, and regional air cargo business operators), as well as the PAAV team’s research activities during the last two years including four tabletop exercises, a human-in-the-loop simulation study, a numerical simulation study, a functional allocation study, and flight data analysis (Appendix A). This document first describes the expected operational context of PAAV (Section 2), such as the flight mission, baseline UAS components, nominal operations, m:N operations (i.e., "m" remote pilots per "N" aircraft), and off-nominal operations. This context sets the scope for the PAAV concept development work. PAAV concept development assumes that UA operations will be increasingly autonomous. Thus, near- and far-term assumptions are defined (Section 3). PAAV identified seven key challenges for UA operations (Section 4): - Flight route planning - Separation and flow management - Traffic pattern integration - Contingency management - Taxi, takeoff, and landing - m:N operations - Communications operations The following 13 potential solutions to these challenges are then described (Section 5): - Scalable communications architecture - Data link - Designated UAS corridors - Crew planning for m:N operations - Flight route optimization - Traffic load-level control - Trajectory solutions with data link - Automated hazard avoidance for m:N operations - Traffic pattern integration (TPI) tool - Standard lost command and control (C2) link (LC2L) procedures - Automated hazard avoidance under LC2L - Auto-taxi, auto-takeoff, and auto-land - Ground control station (GCS) user interface for m:N operations The document attempts to link each of these solutions to one or more of the challenge areas. Novel solutions involving numerous automation technologies are needed to mitigate traffic and airspace management challenges, especially for realizing m:N operations and ensuring safety under LC2L conditions. The purpose of this document is to help understand alternatives and tradeoffs among potential solutions and provide a foundation for a cohesive PAAV concept that will be described and refined in subsequent concept versions.

Unmanned aircraft, uncrewed aircraft, regional air↗

NASA NTRS2018

Urban Air Mobility (UAM) Market Study

The Booz Allen Team explored market size and potential barriers to Urban Air Mobility (UAM) by focusing on three potential markets – Airport Shuttle, Air Taxi, and Air Ambulance. We found that the Airport Shuttle and Air Taxi markets are viable, with a significant total available market value in the U.S. of $500 billion, for a fully unconstrained scenario. In this unconstrained best-case scenario, passengers would have the ability to access and fly a UAM at any time, from any location to any destination, without being hindered by constraints such as weather, infrastructure, or traffic volume. Significant legal and regulatory, weather, certification, public perception, and infrastructure constraints exist, which reduce the market potential for these applications to only about 0.5% of the total available market, or $2.5 billion, in the near term. However, we determined that these constraints can be addressed through ongoing intra-governmental partnerships, government and industry collaboration, strong industry commitment, and existing legal and regulatory enablers. We found that the Air Ambulance market is not a viable market if served by electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) vehicles due to technology constraints but may potentially be viable if a hybrid VTOL aircraft are utilized. The barriers and challenges we characterized in this study can be stratified according to their applicability or potential mitigation through technology as well as market maturity (Figure 1). In the near term, high cost of service will be a key economic challenge. We found potential for significant reduction in service cost through increased vehicle and component efficiency, and automation in a more mature market scenario. Weather conditions also pose a challenge to the UAM market, though there is potential for mitigation of some of these impacts through technology such as sensors enabling operations in low visibility. However, even in a mature market with advanced technology, disruptions are still likely to occur due to weather events such as thunderstorms and strong winds. High density operations will likely stress the current Air Traffic Management (ATM) system in the near term, but technology and new initiatives such as the Air Traffic Management -eXploration project (ATM-X) will enable safe and efficient integration of UAM into the National Airspace System (NAS). Current battery technology creates a barrier in the near term, especially for the Air Ambulance market, as battery weight and extensive recharging times would be needed for these operations. Advancements in battery technology, as well as use of hybrid VTOLs, could significantly reduce this barrier in the longer term. As UAM emerges as a viable mode of transportation in the near term, adverse energy and environmental impacts, particularly noise, may impact community acceptance and potentially persist as the market matures into larger-scale operations. For non-technology related challenges, we found that infrastructure constraints will create a significant barrier to UAM in the near term but could be addressed in the longer term through development and expansion of vertiports. Competition from existing modes of transportation such as ride-sharing (e.g., Lyft, Uber) and ground taxi’s pose a key barrier to UAM in the short term, which will likely evolve into competition from other emerging technologies such as autonomous cars and electric trains in the longer term. Weather events will influence other components of the operation such as passenger comfort (e.g., extreme temperatures, turbulence) and infrastructure (e.g., winter weather causing cracks and degradation in vertiports). There is also potential for these impacts to be heightened in the longer term from the increased frequency of adverse weather such as thunderstorms due to changing climatic conditions. We also found that the public has strong concerns about safety as a passenger in a piloted UAM, including “lasing” of pilots, unruly passengers, and sabotage. They would prefer that all passengers pass through a security screening process before boarding a vehicle. They would also prefer to use UAM for longer regional trips, such as flying from Washington, DC to Baltimore, MD or San Diego, CA to Los Angeles, CA. A longer term automated UAM vehicle market will face challenges due to public apprehension about automation and unmanned operations, and a preference to fly with passengers they know in an autonomous (unmanned) operational scenario.

Rohit Goyal↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Hazard Perception & Avoidance (HPA), Assured Vehicle Automation 1 Simulation (AVA-1h) Results Outbrief

In late 2022, the Human Autonomy Teaming Lab (NASA Ames Research Center) conducted a manned, human-in-the-loop (HITL) simulation. This HITL was the lab’s second Hazard Perception and Avoidance (HPA) technical work under NASA’s Advanced Air Mobility (AAM), Automated Flight and Contingency Management (AFCM) Sub-Project. The goals were to assess detect and avoid technology for manned, electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft. This simulation tested Resolution Advisory (RA) responses and return-to-course (RTC) maneuvers for the second version of the Airborne Collision Avoidance System’s (ACAS) rotary-wing (Xr) variant. This was conducted at the center's Vertical Motion Simulator (VMS), on a motion-based platform, and was configured to fly eVTOL aircraft while maneuvering for intruding traffic. Variables for this study included ACAS Xr modes (i.e., TA/RA and DAA) and phases of flight (i.e., Cruise, Hover, and Approach). The data collected included response times, losses of well clear, and pilots' noncompliances to alerts and guidance as well as subjective ratings like acceptability and perceived workload. Additional details and future anticipations are also discussed.

ACAS Xr↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Automated Management of Small Unmanned Aircraft System Communications and Navigation Contingency

The number of small Unmanned Aircraft System (sUAS) operating in the low-altitude of the National Airspace System (NAS) has been rapidly increasing in the past few years and this number is expected to grow in the future. However, aside from a few special cases, all sUAS must fly within visual line-of-sight (VLOS) of their operators and this limitation is blocking highly anticipated beyond visual line-of-sight (BVLOS) sUAS applications such as package delivery from practice. To enable routine low-altitude BVLOS operations, there needs to be a traffic management ecosystem that complements the FAA’s Air Traffic Management (ATM) system, which does not provide air traffic services under 400 feet above ground level (AGL). NASA has been pioneering research and development of this ecosystem under UAS Traffic Management (UTM) project since 2015 in a series of Technical Capability Levels (TCL) activities that are increasingly complex. In TCL1, completed in 2015, visual line-of-sight operations such as agriculture, firefighting, and infrastructure monitoring were addressed with a focus on geofencing and operations scheduling. Technologies and requirements needed for BVLOS operations in sparsely populated areas were examined in TCL2 in 2016, and those for operations over moderately populated areas in TCL3 in 2017 and 2018. TCL4 is building on the earlier TCLs and focuses on technologies and requirements for operations in higher-density urban areas for tasks such as newsgathering and package delivery and for managing large-scale contingencies. To coordinate and facilitate the incremental implementation of the UTM ecosystem in the NAS, a Research Transition Team (RTT) has been formed between the FAA, NASA, and industry. The RTT is divided into four subgroups, concept and use case development, data exchange and information architecture, sense and avoid, and communications and navigation (C&N). This paper focuses on C&N subgroup activities, in particular about the development of automated sUAS communications and navigation contingency management. The goal of this development is to prepare sUAS to display predictable behavior while handling C&N off-nominal events. It is expected that the adoption of the presented automated contingency management by the sUAS community will accommodate and inform rulemaking towards governing low-altitude BVLOS operations.

Unmanned Aviation System (UAS) Traffic Management↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Automated Management of Small Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Communications and Navigation Contingency

Unmanned Aviation Systems (UAS) Traffic Management↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Assured Vehicle Automation 1 Sim - Results Outbrief

In early 2022, the Human Autonomy Teaming Lab (NASA Ames Research Center) conducted a manned, human-in-the-loop (HITL) simulation. This part-task HITL began the lab’s Hazard Perception and Avoidance (HPA) technical work under NASA’s Advanced Air Mobility (AAM), Automated Flight and Contingency Management (AFCM) Sub-Project. The results of that sim guided the objectives of the current study, which were to examine pilots’ use of the Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS) rotorcraft variant (Xr) v2 in multiple phases of flight with two separate Xr Modes, fully leverage Xr v2 features (e.g., use radar altimeter data to inform low altitude Resolution Advisory [RA] behavior, utilize the ability to designate “terminal-area intruders,” and display airspeed-based Detect and Avoid [DAA] guidance), emulate a “Traffic Advisory” (TA), and present Xr in a higher-fidelity environment. Therefore, this study was conducted in the Vertical Motion Simulator, and the variables included Phase of Flight (En-route, Hover, and Approach) as well as ACAS Xr Mode (TA/RA and DAA). The data collected included response times, losses of well clear, and maneuver sizes and durations as well as subjective ratings like acceptability and usability. Additional details and future anticipations are also discussed.

air taxis↗

NASA NTRS2007

Crew Procedures for Continuous Descent Arrivals Using Conventional Guidance

This paper presents results from a simulation study which investigated the use of Continuous Descent Arrival (CDA) procedures for conducting a descent through a busy terminal area, using conventional transport-category automation. This research was part of the Low Noise Flight Procedures (LNFP) element within the Quiet Aircraft Technology (QAT) Project, that addressed development of flight guidance, and supporting pilot and Air Traffic Control (ATC) procedures for low noise operations. The procedures and chart were designed to be easy to understand, and to make it easy for the crew to make changes via the Flight Management Computer Control-Display Unit (FMC-CDU) to accommodate changes from ATC. The test runs were intended to represent situations typical of what exists in many of today's terminal areas, including interruptions to the descent in the form of clearances issued by ATC.

Oseguera-Lohr, Rosa M.↗

NASA NTRS1992

Design and evaluation of an advanced air-ground data-link system for air traffic control

The design and evaluation of the ground-based portion of an air-ground data-link system for air traffic control (ATC) are described. The system was developed to support the 4D Aircraft/ATC Integration Study, a joint simulation experiment conducted at NASA's Ames and Langley Research Centers. The experiment focused on airborne and ground-based procedures for handling aircraft equipped with a 4D-Flight Management System (FMS) and the system requirements needed to ensure conflict-free traffic flow. The Center/TRACON Automation System (CTAS) at Ames was used for the ATC part of the experiment, and the 4D-FMS-equipped aircraft was simulated by the Transport Systems Research Vehicle (TSRV) simulator at Langley. The data-link system supported not only conventional ATC communications, but also the communications needed to accommodate the 4D-FMS capabilities of advanced aircraft. Of great significance was the synergism gained from integrating the data link with CTAS. Information transmitted via the data link was used to improve the monitoring and analysis capability of CTAS without increasing controller input workload. Conversely, CTAS was used to anticipate and create prototype messages, thus reducing the workload associated with the manual creation of data-link messages.

Denbraven, Wim↗

NASA NTRS2018

Airspace Technology Demonstration 3 (ATD-3) Multi-Flight Common Route (MFCR) Technology Transfer Document Summary Version 2.0

Airspace Technology Demonstration - 3 (ATD-3) is part of NASA's Airspace Operations and Safety Program (AOSP) - specifically, its Airspace Technology Demonstrations (ATD) Project. ATD-3 is a multi-year research and development effort which proposes to develop and demonstrate automation technologies and operating concepts that enable air navigation service providers and airspace users to continuously assess weather, winds, traffic, and other information to identify, evaluate, and implement workable opportunities for flight plan route corrections that can result in significant flight time and fuel savings in en-route airspace. In order to ensure that the products of this tech-transfer are relevant and useful, NASA has created strong partnerships with the FAA and key industry stakeholders. This summary document and accompanying technology artifacts satisfy the second of three Research Transition Products (RTPs) defined in the Applied Traffic Flow Management (ATFM) Research Transition Team (RTT) Plan. The original transfer, completed in December 2017, consisted of NASA's Multi-Flight Common Route (MFCR) research for efficient route corrections for en-route weather avoidance. This transfer updates the Concept of Operations document to a publicly-available NASA Technical Memorandum. The MFCR concept builds on the experience of the legacy Dynamic Weather Routes (DWR) and focuses on a better balance of potential savings with ATC acceptability, common route corrections options for multiple flights on similar routings, and better use of existing and/or modern automation for communication and coordination of route change options. All of these capabilities are expected to improve system performance significantly in terms of actual delay-reducing clearances issued to flights compared to that of the DWR tool and operating concept.

Tech transfer↗

NASA NTRS1993

Aviation Weather Program (AWP)

The Aviation Weather Program (AWP) combines additional weather observations, improved forecast technology, and more efficient distribution of information to pilots, controllers, and automated systems to improve the weather information provided to the air traffic control system, pilots, and other users of aviation weather information. Specific objectives include the needs to: improve airport and en-route capacity by accurate, high resolution, timely forecasts of changing weather conditions affecting airport and en-route operations; improve analyses and forecasts of upper-level winds for efficient flight planning and traffic management; and increase flight safety through improved aviation weather hazard forecasting (e.g. icing, turbulence, severe storms, microbursts, or strong winds). The AWP would benefit from participation in a cooperative multiscale experiment by obtaining data for: evaluation of aviation weather forecast products, analysis of four dimensional data assimilation schemes, and experimental techniques for retrieving aerosol and other visibility parameters. A multiscale experiment would also be helpful to AWP by making it possible to evaluate the added benefit of enhanced data sets collected during the experiment on those forecast and analysis products. The goals of the Coperative Multiscale Experiment (CME) are an essential step in attaining the long-term AWP objective of providing two-to-four hour location-specific forecasts of significant weather. Although the possibility of a funding role for the AWP in the CME is presently unclear, modest involvement of Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)/AWP personnel could be expected.

Foote, Brant↗

NASA NTRS2000

A Vision of the Future Air Traffic Control System

The air transportation system is on the verge of gridlock, with delays and cancelled flights this summer reaching all time highs. As demand for air transportation continues to increase, the capacity needed to accommodate the growth in traffic is falling farther and farther behind. Moreover, it has become increasingly apparent that the present system cannot be scaled up to provide the capacity increases needed to meet demand over the next 25 years. NASA, working with the Federal Aviation Administration and industry, is pursuing a major research program to develop air traffic management technologies that have the ultimate goal of doubling capacity while increasing safety and efficiency. This seminar will describe how the current system operates, what its limitations are and why a revolutionary "shift in paradigm" is needed to overcome fundamental limitations in capacity and safety. For the near term, NASA has developed a portfolio of software tools for air traffic controllers, called the Center-TRACON Automation System (CTAS), that provides modest gains in capacity and efficiency while staying within the current paradigm. The outline of a concept for the long term, with a deployment date of 2015 at the earliest, has recently been formulated and presented by NASA to a select group of industry and government stakeholders. Automated decision making software, combined with an Internet in the sky that enables sharing of information and distributes control between the cockpit and the ground, is key to this concept. However, its most revolutionary feature is a fundamental change in the roles and responsibilities assigned to air traffic controllers.

Erzberger, Heinz↗

NASA NTRS2010

Constraint and Flight Rule Management for Space Mission Operations

The exploration of space is one of the most fascinating domains to study from a human factors perspective. Like other complex work domains such as aviation (Pritchett and Kim, 2008), air traffic management (Durso and Manning, 2008), health care (Morrow, North, and Wickens, 2006), homeland security (Cooke and Winner, 2008), and vehicle control (Lee, 2006), space exploration is a large-scale sociotechnical work domain characterized by complexity, dynamism, uncertainty, and risk in real-time operational contexts (Perrow, 1999; Woods et al, 1994). Nearly the entire gamut of human factors issues - for example, human-automation interaction (Sheridan and Parasuraman, 2006), telerobotics, display and control design (Smith, Bennett, and Stone, 2006), usability, anthropometry (Chaffin, 2008), biomechanics (Marras and Radwin, 2006), safety engineering, emergency operations, maintenance human factors, situation awareness (Tenney and Pew, 2006), crew resource management (Salas et al., 2006), methods for cognitive work analysis (Bisantz and Roth, 2008) and the like -- are applicable to astronauts, mission control, operational medicine, Space Shuttle manufacturing and assembly operations, and space suit designers as they are in other work domains (e.g., Bloomberg, 2003; Bos et al, 2006; Brooks and Ince, 1992; Casler and Cook, 1999; Jones, 1994; McCurdy et al, 2006; Neerincx et aI., 2006; Olofinboba and Dorneich, 2005; Patterson, Watts-Perotti and Woods, 1999; Patterson and Woods, 2001; Seagull et ai, 2007; Sierhuis, Clancey and Sims, 2002). The human exploration of space also has unique challenges of particular interest to human factors research and practice. This chapter provides an overview of those issues and reports on some of the latest research results as well as the latest challenges still facing the field.

Barreiro, J.↗

NASA NTRS2010

Human Factors in Space Exploration

The exploration of space is one of the most fascinating domains to study from a human factors perspective. Like other complex work domains such as aviation (Pritchett and Kim, 2008), air traffic management (Durso and Manning, 2008), health care (Morrow, North, and Wickens, 2006), homeland security (Cooke and Winner, 2008), and vehicle control (Lee, 2006), space exploration is a large-scale sociotechnical work domain characterized by complexity, dynamism, uncertainty, and risk in real-time operational contexts (Perrow, 1999; Woods et ai, 1994). Nearly the entire gamut of human factors issues - for example, human-automation interaction (Sheridan and Parasuraman, 2006), telerobotics, display and control design (Smith, Bennett, and Stone, 2006), usability, anthropometry (Chaffin, 2008), biomechanics (Marras and Radwin, 2006), safety engineering, emergency operations, maintenance human factors, situation awareness (Tenney and Pew, 2006), crew resource management (Salas et aI., 2006), methods for cognitive work analysis (Bisantz and Roth, 2008) and the like -- are applicable to astronauts, mission control, operational medicine, Space Shuttle manufacturing and assembly operations, and space suit designers as they are in other work domains (e.g., Bloomberg, 2003; Bos et al, 2006; Brooks and Ince, 1992; Casler and Cook, 1999; Jones, 1994; McCurdy et ai, 2006; Neerincx et aI., 2006; Olofinboba and Dorneich, 2005; Patterson, Watts-Perotti and Woods, 1999; Patterson and Woods, 2001; Seagull et ai, 2007; Sierhuis, Clancey and Sims, 2002). The human exploration of space also has unique challenges of particular interest to human factors research and practice. This chapter provides an overview of those issues and reports on sorne of the latest research results as well as the latest challenges still facing the field.

FROM↗

NASA NTRS2022

National Campaign (NC)-1 Strategic Conflict Management Simulation (X4) Community Based Rules

Projected demand for transportation services in the urban environment has led to the development of several Concepts of Operation for Urban Air Mobility, or UAM. UAM is a concept for the transportation of people and goods in the metropolitan environment using small, efficient aircraft over short distances as part of an expanding multimodal transportation network. UAM will leverage emerging technologies including electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing (eVTOL) aircraft, increasing levels of automation and a new operational paradigm in dense airspace where a set of agreed-upon rules govern the procedures and interactions defining a cooperative environment in which operators are entrusted with a range of functions typically conducted by Air Traffic Control (ATC). These rules, proposed in the FAA NextGen Office’s UAM Concept of Operations [1], were originally termed Community Based Rules or Community Business Rules (CBRs), and will in the future termed Cooperative Operating Practices (COPs); this document uses the original term, CBR. CBRs are a set of rules, developed by the UAM community and (where necessary) approved by the FAA that govern the interactions between UAM entities and limit the need for ATC services including, but not limited to, separation control by ATC, addressing a fundamental challenge to scaling UAM operations. UAM community development of CBRs is anticipated to accelerate the adoption of new practices while retaining the regulatory authority of the FAA within required domains (e.g., NAS safety, security and equal access). However, there currently exists no agreed industry forum or defined procedures for CBR development. Investigation of best practices for the development of UAM CBRs was identified by NASA and the FAA NextGen Office as a research need. In collaboration with seven industry partners, NASA participated in a series of simulations that investigated elements of the envisioned UAM operations, with a primary focus on Strategic Conflict Management (SCM). The development and conduct of cooperative UAM simulations with seven industry partners provided a unique opportunity to investigate CBR development practices. Development of CBRs for the UAM SCM simulations was conducted in parallel with simulation capability development and was closely related to requirements definition for the simulations. As such, the CBR development effort presented herein had two objectives: explore CBR development practices in collaboration with the industry partners and develop an initial set of UAM CBRs to support simulation requirements definition and development. Consensus was achieved among NASA and the industry partners on 24 CBRs that were developed to support the cooperative simulation operations across five topic areas: General (related to test requirements), Operational Intent, Conformance Monitoring, Demand Capacity Balancing, and Airspace Constraint Management. Additional topic areas and CBRs were discussed but were deemed outside the scope of the simulation; these are included in the appendices. A collaborative, iterative process was employed for developing the CBRs engaging both NASA and Industry; because CBR development is envisioned to be community-driven, opportunities were sought that provided industry partners leadership roles in developing CBRs. The following key observations and recommendations may aid the UAM industry in future CBR development efforts: - The lack of a defined process proved challenging initially. Stakeholder engagement in the early stages of CBR development was intermittent and may have been due to the lack of a clear definition of roles and responsibilities of those involved in the effort. - Industry leadership of CBR topic areas proved successful. Discussions in these topic areas were engaging, with alternate viewpoints freely discussed and detailed CBRs resulting. This points to the importance of identifying the best-suited leadership in technical areas for CBR development. - Discussions within a CBR topic area were typically dominated by only a few participants. Whereas all industry partners contributed to CBR development, within each topic area, technical leadership was evident even when not formally established. This observation may indicate that smaller, focused groups may be more effective in initial CBR development than an open forum or large standards development effort (although both maybe required prior to FAA review and approval for some CBRs). - Identifying suitable forums for initial UAM CBR development and identifying the most effective industry participants and leadership will be crucial for successful CBR development. Although the operational need for UAM CBRs may not be immediate, establishing the forums and leadership to define the processes for CBR development is a prudent early step to UAM realization.

Community Based Rules↗