Evaluation of Pathway Symbology Used to Land from Curved Approaches with Varying Visibility Conditions

Abstract

Global Positioning System technology has the potential to revolutionize both commercial and military aircraft landing procedures. It will enable pilots to fly complex, curved approaches rather than the more simple straight-in approaches necessitated by the Instrument Landing System used at most large airports. To complement this technology, Head-Up Display pathway symbology was developed for use in the aircraft to help pilots stay on course during these complex landings. Thirteen Air Force pilots used this pathway symbology in a simulator to land under Visual Meteorological, Partial Instrument Meteorological and Full Instrument Meteorological visibility conditions. Deviations from commanded flight path, as well as lateral and longitudinal deviations from a desired runway touchdown point, were measured. Results indicated that landing performance was acceptable for all pilots and functionally equivalent in all weather conditions. Results of this study suggest that pathway symbology could provide the cues necessary to successfully fly complex, curved approaches to landing. In addition, the merits of using Equivalency Analysis, rather than traditional Analysis of Variance in testing for performance differences is discussed.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Food and Drug Administration Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. (1997). Approved drug products with therapeutic equivalence evaluations [Online]. Available: http://www.fda.gov/cder/da/adppreface.htm#Statistical Criteria for Bioequivalence. [October 24, 1997].

Hart

D. C.

(1993). Satellites for Approach Navigation. Avionics Magazine, August, 23–28.

Harvey

D. S.

(1997). Industry Gears Up for JPALS, Avionics Magazine, November, 34–37.

Haskell

I. D.

Wickens

C. D.

(1993). Two- and three-dimensional displays for aviation - A theoretical and empirical comparison. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 3(2), 87–109.

Hoover

G. W.

Cronauer

V. T.

Shelley

S. H.

(1985). Command flight path display F-14A flight test program (NADC-85128-60). Warminster, PA: Naval Air Development Center.

Reising

J. M.

Liggett

K. K.

Solz

T. J.

Hartsock

D. C.

(1995). Comparison of two head up display formats used to fly curved instrument approaches. In Proceedings of the 39th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (pp. 1–5). Santa Monica, CA: HFES.

Rogers

Howard

K. I.

Vessey

J. T.

(1993). Using significance tests to evaluate equivalence between two experimental groups. Psychological Bulletin, 113(3), 553–565.

U.S. Air Force manual 11–217. (1996). Instrument Flight Procedures, volume 1. Washington, DC: U.S Government Printing Office.

U.S. Department of Defense. (1996). Department of Defense Interface Standard, Aircraft Display Symbology, MIL-STD-1787B. Washington, DC: U.S Government Printing Office.

10.

Watler

Logan

(1981). The maneuvering flight path display - A flight trajectory solution display concept. In Proceedings of the National Aerospace and Electronics Conference (pp. 1254–1260). New York, NY: IEEE.