Skip to main content

Which Minimum Visual Tracking Performance is Needed in a Remote Tower Optical System?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Virtual and Remote Control Tower

Part of the book series: Research Topics in Aerospace ((RTA))

  • 359 Accesses

Abstract

To maintain or even increase the ATCO’s situation awareness at a remote tower working position, augmentation features are introduced, such as automated tracking of objects. Moving objects (aircraft, vehicles, persons, etc.) the ATCO is interested in are tracked and augmented by this function. However, a tracking function is never reliable by 100% and nuisance tracking information occur, information, which is not of operational relevance and is disturbing to the ATCO. Not only human performance gains by “wanted” tracking information but also losses due to “nuisance” tracking information are to be expected. This paper investigates the effect of visual tracking function in a Remote Tower Optical System on ATCO’s acceptance and effects on situation awareness and workload. Erroneous tracking performance will be discussed within the framework of a response matrix (e.g. Wickens, Elementary Signal Detection Theory, Oxford University Press (2002) and Appendix B). It collects the correct and false (system) responses as conditional probabilities for two alternative situations (object to be tracked/object not to be tracked), or for signal and noise. In a human-in-the-loop real time simulation, seven ATCOs performed a realistic traffic scenario. The study was conducted at Remote Tower laboratory at DLR in Braunschweig. As an experimental condition the performance of the visual tracking was operationalized by the number of nuisance tracking indication: (1) none (no visual tracking (baseline)), (2) low, (3) medium, and (4) large number. The results show that ATCOs very much appreciate visual tracking information. ATCOs can more easily detect critical traffic situation, which increases their situation awareness and safety. Further on, acceptance is rather high and workload on a moderate level, and both parameters behave rather robustly, even when the number of nuisance tracking information increases.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    This chapter is a revised version of the conference paper Jakobi, Jörn and Meixner, Kim Laura (2018). Effects of Unwanted Tracking Boxes in a Remote Tower Control Environment. International Journal For Traffic And Transport Engineering (ICTTE Belgrade 2018), 27–28. Sep 2018, Belgrade. ISBN 978-86-916,153-4-5. Revisions include additional results and an update of the official EUROCAE ED-240A tracking terminology that progressed with its change 1 release from 2021.

References

  • Badke-Schaub, P., Hofinger, G., & Lauche, K. (2012). Psychologie des sicheren Handelns in Risikobranchen (pp. 3–20). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dehn, D. M. (2008). Assessing the impact of automation on the air traffic controller: The SHAPE questionnaires. Air Traffic Control Quarterly, 16, 127–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EUROCAE. (2021). Minimum Aviation System Performance Specification for Remote Tower Optical Systems. EUROCAE Working Group (WG) 100, Version ED-240A change 1, (in press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman-Berg, F., Allendoerfer, K., & Pai, S. (2008). Nuisance alerts in operational ATC environments: Classification and frequencies. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 52, 104–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, D. M. & Swets, J. A. (1988). Signal Detection Theory and Psychophysics, Peninsula publishing: Reprint edition, Los Altos Hills, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Fürstenau, N., Rudolph, M., Schmidt, M., Werther, B., Hetzheim, H., Halle, W., & Tuchscheerer, W. (2007). Flugverkehr-Leiteinrichtung (Virtual Tower). European Patent EP1791364A1. Priority 23.11.2005. granted 30.05.2007

    Google Scholar 

  • Möhlenbrink, C., Papenfuss, A., & Jakobi, J. (2011). The role of workload for work organization in a remote tower control center. Air Traffic Control Quarterly, 20(1), 5–26. https://doi.org/10.2514/atcq.20.1.5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kraemer, J. & Süß H. -M. (2015). SARA-T: Validierung eines Echtzeit Mess- und Validierungstools für das Situationsbewusstsein. Available from Internet: http://elib.dlr.de/98839/2/DLRK_2015_Kraemer_Süß_20150914.pdf.

  • Papenfuss, A. & Möhlenbrink, C. (2016). Assessing Operational Validity of Remote Tower Control in High-Fidelity Simulation. In N. Fürstenau (Ed.), Virtual and Remote Control Tower. Research, Design, Development and Validation (S. 87–113). Schweiz: Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, M., Rudolph, M., Werther, B., Möhlenbrink, C., & Fürstenau, N. (2007). Development of an augmented vision video-panorama human-machine interface for remote airport tower operation. In M. J. Smith & G. Salvendy (Eds.), Lecture Notes Computer Science (LNCS): Human Interface II (Vol. 4558, pp. 1119–1128). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • SESAR. (2012). Instantaneous self assessment of workload. Available from Internet. Retrieved March 12, 2017, from https://ext.eurocontrol.int/ehp/?q=node/1585.

  • SESAR JU. (2014a). Remotely Provided Air Traffic Service for Single Aerodrome VALR (Remark: VALR=Validation report), SESAR JU Deliverable D08-02, Edition 00.05.02, 2014-05-01

    Google Scholar 

  • SESAR JU. (2014b). VALR Multiple Remote TWR V2 (Remark: VALR=Validation report), SESAR JU Deliverable D97, Edition 00.01.00, 2014-06-11

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Schaik, F. J., Roessingh, J. J. M., Lindqvist, G. & Fält, K. (2016a). Detection and Recognition for Remote Tower Operations. In N. Fürstenau (Ed.), Virtual and Remote Control Tower. Research, Design, Development and Validation (S. 53–65). Schweiz: Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Schaik, F. J., Roessingh, J. J. M., Bengtsson, J., Lindqvist, G. & Fält, K. (2016b). The Advanced Remote Tower System and Its Validation. In N. Fürstenau (Ed.), Virtual and Remote Control Tower. Research, Design, Development and Validation (S. 263–278). Schweiz: Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wickens, T. D. (2002). Elementary Signal Detection Theory. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jörn Jakobi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Jakobi, J., Meixner, K.L. (2022). Which Minimum Visual Tracking Performance is Needed in a Remote Tower Optical System?. In: Fürstenau, N. (eds) Virtual and Remote Control Tower. Research Topics in Aerospace. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-93650-1_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-93650-1_15

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-93649-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-93650-1

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics