- Amnesty International report brands Libya's militias 'out of control'
- Obama proposes bringing jobs home from overseas. Would his plan work?
- Obama's NASA budget: Mars takes a hit, but space science isn't dead
- Payroll tax deal close: Why did Republicans back down? (+video)
- Israel says Bangkok, Delhi, and Tbilisi attacks all linked – to Iran
- Rick Santorum's new machine-gun ad: Will it work? (+video)
- Honduras prison fire kills more than 300, highlights regional problem (+video)
- Angry Birds joins Facebook in bid to reach 800 million users
Airline safety: The next generation of smart planes
New ways of handling air traffic, including 3-D infrared upfront, may cut delays and improve airline safety.
(Page 2 of 2)
In 1992, the airline began working with the FAA on using GPS to guide landings there, says Ken Williams, the airline’s fleet captain. At the time, the airport had only one navigation aid at only one end of the runway. If you wanted to land, cloud ceilings could be no lower than 1,000 feet. Conditions are often much worse than that. And you had to be able to see at least three miles ahead. If you missed your approach, you had to fly out and try again.
Skip to next paragraph“If the nav aid went out, you had to wait for the FAA to send up a flight-check aircraft to revalidate the nav aid,” he says. That could take two or three days.
Once the airline linked GPS data into aircraft flight-management computers, its planes could land with clouds only 330 feet from the ground and with visibility of one mile – no ground systems needed. If the
airport adds approach lights to that end of the runway, the airline could operate with ceilings of 250 feet and visibility of half a mile.
Couple this with visualization tools developed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Captain Williams says, and any airline with the right in-cockpit gear could drop that ceiling level to 50 feet, with 300-foot visibility without the expensive land-based navigation aids currently needed to support air traffic under bad weather conditions.
The visualization tools include an infrared video camera in the nose. Its images appear on a screen, along with data from the aircraft’s flight computer, to give pilots the ability to “see” through all but a Martha’s Vineyard-type fog. If visibility gets that bad, flight crews could pull up a 3-D image of the terrain around them from a vast database of maps. The plane’s location within this virtual terrain is continuously updated from GPS data.
Researchers talk of eventually incorporating some of these visualization tools into helmetlike displays, says Steven Young, a researcher at NASA’s Langley Research Center in Hampton, Va. This would allow pilots to scan their windows without losing track of vital flight information. At the moment, so-called heads-up displays “have a very narrow field of view,” Mr. Young says. “Some people have called it like looking through a straw” because pilots can focus on looking through the display so intently that they in effect tune out their peripheral vision.
Meanwhile, in Louisville, Ky., United Parcel Service is experimenting with another NextGen tool, known in geekspeak as automated dependent surveillance broadcast (ADS-B). It’s a way for aircraft to share location, altitude, speed, direction, and “intent” information with ground stations or other aircraft.
Longer-term, ADS-B is envisioned to form the backbone of an airborne Internet, adds NASA’s Young. Pilots will have onboard displays showing the course of other aircraft in their vicinity. Cockpit computers will adjust course and speed to ensure the plane reaches preset way points on time without fear of more tightly spaced planes drifting too close to one another.
Pilots can intervene or chart a new course based on weather ahead, with the ADS-B system merging them into the new traffic flow. Air-traffic controllers, whom the FAA expects to maintain at today’s staffing levels, will manage the system, rather than direct each individual flight.
One key issue is designing the system in ways that don’t make it easy for flight crews’ minds to wander – or to nod off, as some pilots suspect happened with Northwest Airlines Flight 188, which overshot the Minneapolis airport by some 150 miles before the flight crew realized what had happened. Of perhaps greater concern is the need to design the system in ways that don’t overload pilots with information, undercutting their “situation awareness” by giving them too much to track.
“That’s a huge issue – how to make sure the pilots focus on the right things,” says Greg Abjerg, national director of airspace planning for HNTB, an architecture and engineering firm based in Overland Park, Kan. “You can get so focused you forget to look out the window.”



Previous





Become part of the Monitor community
36K on Facebook | 12K on Twitter | 2,250 on YouTube