Airborne Separation Assurance Systems: Towards a work programme to prove safety

Safety Science

Volumn 42, Issue 8, 2004, Pages 723-754

  Brooker, Peter ^a  

^a CRANFIELD UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Air traffic management; Formal safety assessment; Modelling; Probability; Risk analysis

Indexed keywords

AIRCRAFT; BUDGET CONTROL; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; PROBABILITY; RELIABILITY; RISK ASSESSMENT;

AIR TRAFFIC SERVICES; AIRCRAFT PILOTS;

ACCIDENT PREVENTION;

AIRPLANE PILOT; AVIATION; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HUMAN; POPULATION MODEL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; SAFETY; VALIDATION PROCESS;

EID: 3042563597     PISSN: 09257535     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2003.12.002     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Abeloos, A., Mulder, M., van Paasen, R., Hoffman, E., 2000. Potential co-operations between the TCAS and the ASAS. International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction in Aeronautics (HCI-Aero 2000). Toulouse, 27-29 September 2000. Available from 〈http://www.eurocontrol.fr/projects/freer/ archive/hci_aero.pdf〉
2. Amalberti R. The paradoxes of almost totally safe transportation systems. Safety Science. 37:2001;109-126
3. Barnett A. Free-flight and en route air safety: a first-order analysis. Operations Research. 48(6):2000;833-845
4. BASI, 1991. Limitations of the See-and-Avoid Principle. Australian Department of Transport and Communications
5. Baumgartner M. One safe sky for Europe - a revolution in European ATM. The Controller. (July):2003;8-12
6. Brooker P. Future air traffic management - passing the key tests. The Aeronautical Journal. 106(1058):2002;211-215
7. Brooker P. Future air traffic management: quantitative en route safety assessment Part 2 - new approaches. Journal of the Institute of Navigation. 55(3):2002;363-379
8. Brooker P. Future air traffic management: strategy and control philosophy. The Aeronautical Journal. 107(October):2003;589-598
9. Brooker, P., 2004a. Radar inaccuracies and mid-air collision risk: Part 1 - a dynamic methodology. Journal of the Institute of Navigation, in press
10. Brooker, P., 2004b. Radar inaccuracies and mid-air collision risk: Part 2 - en route radar separation minima. Journal of the Institute of Navigation, in press
11. Brooker, P., 2004c. Future air traffic management systems and financial decision-making constraints. Transportation, in press
12. Brooker, P., Ingham, T., 1977. Target levels of safety for controlled airspace. CAA Paper 77002. CAA, London
13. Brooker P., White F.A. Minimum navigation performance specification and other separation variables in the North Atlantic area. Journal of the Institute of Navigation. 32(3):1979;357-374
14. Davies, E.H., Sharpe, A.G., 1993. Review of the target level of safety for NAT MNPS airspace. CS Report 9301. NATS, London
15. Dougherty E.M. Human reliability analysis - where shouldst thou turn? Reliability Engineering and System Safety. 29:1990;283-299
16. EC (European Commission) Transport RTD Programme, 1999. Emerald (Emerging RTD Activities of relevance to ATM Concept Definition) - Final Summary Report. Available from 〈http://www.cordis.lu/transport/src/emeraldrep.htm〉
17. Eurocontrol, 1998. EATMS validation strategy document. Available from 〈http://www.eurocontrol.int/eatmp/library/documents/EATMS_Validation_
18. Eurocontrol, 2002a. ACAS brochure. Available from 〈http://www.nbaa. org/intl/acas2_training_brochure.pdf〉
19. Eurocontrol, 2002b. Investigation of experience in modeling and determining separation minima. CARE-ASAS Activity 3. Available from 〈http://www.eurocontrol.int/care/asas/documentation/care-asas-a3-01-019. pdf〉
20. Eurocontrol SRC (Safety Regulation Commission) 2000a. Risk assessment and mitigation in ATM. Eurocontrol Safety Regulatory Requirement ESARR 4. Edition 1.0. Eurocontrol, Brussels
21. Eurocontrol SRC, 2000b. Safety minima study: review of existing standards and practices. SRC Doc 1, Eurocontrol, Brussels. Available from 〈http://www.eurocontrol.be/src/index.html〉
22. FAA/Eurocontrol, 1998. A concept paper for separation safety modeling an FAA/EUROCONTROL cooperative effort on air traffic modeling for separation standards. Available from 〈http://www.faa.gov/asd/ia-or/pdf/cpcomplete. pdf〉
23. FAA/Eurocontrol, 2001. Cooperative R&D: principles of operation for the use of airborne separation assurance systems (version: 7.1). Available from 〈http://human-factors.arc.nasa.gov/ihi/documents/PO-ASAS.pdf〉
24. Foot, P.B., 1994. A review of the results of a trial hazard analysis of airspace sectors 24 and 26S. CS Report 9427, Civil Aviation Authority, London
25. Hacking I. Logic of Statistical Inference. 1976;Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
26. Hale, S., Law, M., 1989. Simultaneous operation of conflict alert and ACAS II in UK en-route airspace. DORA Report 8914, CAA
27. Harrison, D., 1993. Results of ACAS II safety analysis. ICAO Secondary Surveillance Radar Improvements and Collision Avoidance Systems Panel (SICASP/5)
28. Harrison D., Moek G. European studies to investigate the feasibility of using 1000 ft vertical separation minima above FL 290: Part II - precision data analysis and collision risk assessment. Journal of the Institute of Navigation. 45:1992;91-106
29. Hoekstra J.M., Van gent R.N.H.W., Ruigrok R.C.J. Designing for safety: the 'free flight' air traffic management concept. Reliability Engineering and System Safety. 75:2002;215-232
30. Hollnagel E. Human Reliability Analysis: Context and Control. 1993;Academic Press, London
31. May G. A method for predicting the number of near mid-air collisions in a defined airspace. Journal of the Institute of Navigation. 24:1971;204-218
32. Medawar P. The Threat and the Glory. Oxford University Press. 1991
33. Moek G., ten Have J.M., Harrison D., Cox M.E. European studies to investigate the feasibility of using 1000 feet vertical separation minima above FL 290: Part III - further results and overall conclusions. Journal of the Institute of Navigation. 46:1993;245-261
34. Moore, S.M., 1998. Comparison of alerted and visually acquired airborne aircraft in a complex air traffic environment. In: Proceedings of the 1998 advances in aviation safety conference, SAE/P-321, 981205, held at Daytona Beach, Florida, April 6-8, 1998. SAE
35. Moray N. Dougherty's dilemma and the one-sidedness of human reliability analysis. Reliability Engineering and System Safety. 29:1990;337-344
36. NATO RTO Meeting Proceedings 32 (2001). The Human Factor in System Reliability - Is Human Performance Predictable? RTO-MP-032
37. Profit R.R. Systematic Safety Management in the Air Traffic Services. 1995;Euromoney, London
38. Quine W.V. Quiddities: An Intermittently Philosophical Dictionary. 1987;Bellknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, USA
39. Review of the General Concept of Separation Panel (RGCSP) 1995. Working Group A Meeting: Summary of Discussions and Conclusions, 1995. ICAO
40. Sherali H.D., Smith J.C., Trani A.A., Sale S. National airspace. occupancy and conflict analysis models for evaluating scenarios under the free-flight paradigm Transportation Science. 34(40):2000;321-336
41. Shorrock S.T., Kirwan B. Development and application of a human error identification tool for air traffic control. Applied Ergonomics. 33:2002;319-336
42. Simon H.A. Models of Bounded Rationality (vols. 1 and 2). 1982;Cambridge, MA, MIT Press
43. Simpson, R.W., 1998. Structuring criteria for automated separation assurance. In: 2nd USA/Europe Air Traffic Management R&D Seminar. Available from 〈http://atm-seminar-98.eurocontrol.fr/finalpapers/track2/simpson. pdf〉
44. Swain A.D. Human reliability analysis: needs, status, trends and limitations. Reliability Engineering and System Safety. 29:1990;301-313
45. THEATRE website, 2002. Available from 〈http://www.theatre.isdefe.es/ home.sys.html?forum〉
46. The Chambers Dictionary, 1998. Chambers Harrap, Edinburgh
47. Watson S.R. The meaning of probability in probabilistic safety analysis. Reliability Engineering and System Safety. 45:1994;261-269
48. Watson S.R. Response to Yellman, T.W., Murray, T.M., 1995. Comment on 'The meaning of probability in probabilistic safety analysis'. Reliability Engineering and System Safety. 49:1995;207-209
49. Yellman T.W., Murray T.M. Comment on 'The meaning of probability in probabilistic safety analysis'. Reliability Engineering and System Safety. 49:1995;201-205
50. Zeitlin, A.D., 2001. Safety assessments of ADS-B and ASAS. In: 4th USA/Europe Air Traffic Management R&D Seminar. Available from 〈http://www.mitre.org/support/papers/tech_papers_01/zeitlin_safetya/ zeitlin_safety.pdf〉
51. Zeitlin, A.D., Bonnemaison, B., 2000. Managing criticality of ASAS applications. In: 3rd USA/Europe Air Traffic Management R&D Seminar. Available from 〈http://www.caasd.org/library/presentations/zeitlin. pdf〉