Application of DDPG-based Collision Avoidance Algorithm in Air Traffic Control

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Han Wen ◽  
Hui Li ◽  
Zhuang Wang ◽  
Xianle Hou ◽  
Kangxin He
Keyword(s):  
Collision Avoidance ◽  
Traffic Control ◽  
Air Traffic Control ◽  
Air Traffic

Why Air Traffic Control?

1961 ◽  
Vol 65 (606) ◽  
pp. 416-418
Author(s):  
R. F. Hansford
Keyword(s):  
Collision Avoidance ◽  
Traffic Control ◽  
Air Traffic Control ◽  
Air Traffic ◽  
Technical Problems ◽  
The Future ◽  
Collision Avoidance System

To avoid any misunderstandings, it should be made clear that in the author's opinion the techniques of Air Traffic Control are not likely to be significantly affected by the future advent of an air-to-air collision avoidance system. This is admittedly a contentious view and this paper is a brief survey of some of the factors which lead the author to hold this opinion. After clarifying what is meant by an air-to-air collision avoidance system, the paper deals first with some of the operational problems, then with some of the technical problems and concludes with general comments.

Collision Avoidance and the Future of Air Traffic Control

1973 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 423-430 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Ratcliffe
Keyword(s):  
Traffic Flow ◽  
Collision Avoidance ◽  
General Problem ◽  
Traffic Control ◽  
Air Traffic Control ◽  
Air Traffic ◽  
Term Study ◽  
Long Term Study ◽  
Alternative Solutions

This paper is a report on some early findings of a long-term study which has the ambitious objective of suggesting better alternative solutions to the general problem of controlling a collection of aircraft. The study aims to answer questions about the optimum division of responsibility between the aircrew and ground A.T.C., about the way in which the A.T.C. tasks are shared between a number of controllers and A.T.C. computers, and about the fundamental principles on which traffic flow is organized.

Aircraft Collisions

1979 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-29
Author(s):  
Earl L. Wiener
Keyword(s):  
Human Factors ◽  
Control Systems ◽  
Collision Avoidance ◽  
Traffic Control ◽  
Air Traffic Control ◽  
San Diego ◽  
Air Traffic ◽  
Stress Regulation ◽  
Basic Assumptions ◽  
The Many

Several spectacular aircraft collisions, one on the ground at Tenerife, Canary Islands, and mid-airs at Memphis and San Diego, have brought into question the adequacy of present air traffic control systems. Following the San Diego collision in September 1977, between an air carrier B-727 and a Cessna 172, there has been a hue and cry to “do something”. Among the many proposed “solutions” have been tighter restrictions on VFR aircraft, stricter control of mixed IFR and VFR traffic, development of airborn collision avoidance systems, and creation of reliever airports. There has been little recognition of the basic problems of human factors in aircraft collisions. This paper examines collisions from a human factors perspective, seeing them primarily as “system-induced errors” resulting from control systems that stress regulation and airspace allocation, and do not properly consider the human operator. To avoid future accidents, system designers must consider such topics as basic assumptions in air traffic control, mixed IFR and VFR navigation, pilot-controller and controller-controller communications, extra-cockpit vision, workload of pilots and controllers, proposed regulations, and instrumentation.

Evaluation of Flight Deck Procedures Used in the Designation of Traffic for Tailored Collision Avoidance Logic

2016 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-55
Author(s):  
Jennifer Ludvigsen ◽  
Steven Estes ◽  
John Helleberg
Keyword(s):  
Collision Avoidance ◽  
Traffic Control ◽  
Air Traffic Control ◽  
Air Traffic ◽  
Collision Avoidance System ◽  
Flight Deck

The Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS XO) allows a pilot to select traffic for tailored collision avoidance advisories during simultaneous approaches to parallel runways. In the study reviewed in this paper, pilots evaluated ACAS XO procedures during a series of simulated approaches and departures. Half of the pilots were given the traffic to select by Air Traffic Control (ATC), while the remaining pilots had to determine the appropriate traffic to select on their own. Pilots who received the traffic from ATC selected targets more quickly and earlier in the approach. Pilots felt the process was easy and the workload was operationally acceptable. Analysis showed that earlier selection increased the utility of ACAS XO and was preferred by pilots as it allowed the crew to complete the procedure in a lower workload phase of flight.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document