This paper assesses next-generation equipment in air traffic control with particular attention to the human factors associated with implementation and use. Drawing on research by Hesselink and Maycroft, Dubuisson, and Sheridan, the paper examines the Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (a-SMGCS) simulation platform, its architectural components, and the human factors evaluation methods applied during development. It also considers Thomas Sheridan's analysis of the Next Generation Air Transportation System, including risks arising from human-automation interaction, operator trust, situational awareness, and the design assumptions embedded in large-scale automated systems. The paper concludes that simulation technology is central to preparing controllers for increased future air traffic while minimizing human error.
The paper demonstrates effective use of multi-source synthesis: it draws on three separate technical and governmental reports and weaves them together under a single organizing argument — that simulation and human factors analysis are inseparable from next-generation ATC development. Rather than summarizing each source in isolation, the paper uses each one to add a layer (system design, HMI specification, and systemic risk) to a cumulative argument.
The paper opens with a brief orientation paragraph establishing the topic and its importance, then moves through four substantive sections: a description of the a-SMGCS project and its simulation platform components; a breakdown of the system's functional architecture; a detailed human factors evaluation drawing on both Hesselink/Maycroft and Dubuisson; and Sheridan's broader framework for human-automation risks in next-generation systems. A short conclusion ties the technical findings back to the paper's central claim about simulation's role in reducing human error.
Today's technology has extended across every sector of business, and this is certainly true of aviation. There are currently proposals and implementations for advances in aviation technology — specifically as related to air traffic control — that promise to revolutionize the industry. These advances aim to eliminate many of the human factors that lead to error and disaster by taking the guesswork out of the equation through the provision of more thorough information for the human operator.
One example is described in the work of Hesselink and Maycroft (2001), entitled "A Full Visual a-SMGCS Simulation Platform," which relates the construction and evaluation of a real-time, full-vision Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (a-SMGCS) simulation platform for controllers and pilots, including several advanced sensor simulators and a surveillance function. Hesselink and Maycroft state that the project they report was the very first of such projects to "demonstrate and use a full a-SMGCS platform for evaluation of a-SMGCS operation concepts and procedures" (Hesselink and Maycroft, 2001).
The a-SMGCS will serve to "enhance airport efficiency and capacity in low visibility, while at the same time maintaining the current safety level" (Hesselink and Maycroft, 2001). However, Hesselink and Maycroft note that use of this technology must first be met with "extensive offline trials," and since Europe has expressed a "fast growing need for a simulation environment capable of testing, evaluating, and demonstrating a comprehensive environment," a-SMGCS is stated to make such a provision (Hesselink and Maycroft, 2001).
According to Hesselink and Maycroft, many a-SMGCS projects have been implemented in recent years, "leading to first operational implementation of surveillance functions and runway incursion alert functions at airports at this moment" (Hesselink and Maycroft, 2001). However, the majority of those projects are stated to have addressed only one aspect of the a-SMGCS — either on a conceptual level or to study one proposed function. Hesselink and Maycroft report the first of all a-SMGCS projects that "have been set up to create a full a-SMGCS simulator with both controllers and pilots in-the-loop that also provide outside visuals for the operators" (Hesselink and Maycroft, 2001).
The simulation platform is comprised of the following components:
These geographically distant locations were coupled in real time. The project simulates outside visuals and procedures for Amsterdam Airport Schiphol and London Heathrow (Hesselink and Maycroft, 2001).
The functional areas defined within the framework of the project are as follows:
Surveillance: A function of the system that provides identification and accurate positional information on aircraft, vehicles, and unauthorized targets within the required area.
Control: Application of measures to prevent collisions and runway incursions, and to ensure safe, efficient, and expeditious movement.
Routing: The planning and assignment of a route to individual aircraft and vehicles to provide safe, efficient, and expeditious movement from their current position to their intended position.
Guidance: Facilities, information, and advice necessary to provide continuous, unambiguous, and reliable guidance to pilots of aircraft and drivers of vehicles, keeping them on the surfaces and assigned routes intended for their use (Hesselink and Maycroft, 2001).
You’re 31% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 3 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.