Reduced Flight Progress Strips in En Route ATC Mixed Environments

Currently, en route control of high altitude flights between airports uses computer-augmented radar information available on the Plan View Display (PVD), Computer Readout Device (CRD), and flight information printed on Flight Progress Strips (PPSs). The EPS contains thirty-one fields that supplement...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Durso, Francis T, Truitt, Todd R, Hackworth, Carla A, Albright, Chris A, Bleckely, M. K
Format: Report
Language:English
Subjects:
Air Navigation and Guidance
AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS
AIRPORTS
AWARENESS
BEHAVIOR
COMPENSATION
COMPUTER AIDED DIAGNOSIS
Computer Programming and Software
EFFICIENCY
ENVIRONMENTS
FLIGHT CONTROL SYSTEMS
HIGH ALTITUDE
INSTRUCTIONS
MANAGEMENT
MIXING
RADAR
READ OUT TECHNIQUES
REDUCTION
SIMULATION
TEAMS(PERSONNEL)
TEST AND EVALUATION
WORKLOAD
Online Access:Request full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Currently, en route control of high altitude flights between airports uses computer-augmented radar information available on the Plan View Display (PVD), Computer Readout Device (CRD), and flight information printed on Flight Progress Strips (PPSs). The EPS contains thirty-one fields that supplement data available on the PVD. While an aircraft is in a controller's sector, control instructions, changes to the flight plan, and other contacts with the aircraft are written on the corresponding strip. This report describes an experiment that compared the effects of using a standard-sized (1 5/16" x 8") FPS and an FPS reduced both in size (1" x 5") and information on the performance and workload of controller teams. The teams, from Minneapolis ARTCC, controlled simulated air traffic in a mixed radar- environment. Overall, the 1" x 5" reduced strip yielded deficits in the control of nonradar flights but not radar flights. This was evidenced in subject matter experts' evaluation of nonradar separation, strip processing and board management, and, to a marginal extent, in the efficiency of traffic movement through the sector. The radar-side (R-side) controller's awareness was also rated lower when using the smaller strips. Interestingly, the controllers' evaluation of their own performance did not reflect a difference between smaller and normal-sized strips. This may help explain why controllers did not compensate for the smaller strips to any great extent. Only R-side controllers exhibited compensatory behaviors and reported increased workload. R-side controllers also pointed to the PVD more often. Although there was little compensatory activity, R-side Controllers thought workload was greater with smaller strips. R-side controllers also felt it was more effortful and more frustrating working with the 1" x 5" strips.