Pilot Non-Conformance to Alerting System Commands During Closely Spaced Parallel Approaches

Cockpit alerting systems monitor potentially hazardous situations, both inside and outside the aircraft. When a hazard is projected to occur, the alerting system displays alerts and/or command decisions to the pilot. However, pilots have been observed to not conform to alerting system commands by delaying their response or by not following the automatic commands exactly. This non-conformance to the automatic alerting system can reduce its benefit. Therefore, a need exists to understand the causes and effects of pilot non-conformance in order to develop automatic alerting systems whose commands the pilots are more likely to follow. These considerations were examined through flight simulator evaluations of the collision avoidance task during closely spaced parallel approaches. This task provided a useful case-study because the effects of non-conformance can be significant, given the time-critical nature of the task. A preliminary evaluation of alerting systems identified non-conformance in over 40% of the cases and a corresponding drop in collision avoidance performance. A follow-on experiment found subjects' alerting and maneuver selection criteria were consistent with different strategies than those used by automatic systems, indicating the pilot may potentially disagree with the alerting system if the pilot attempts to verify automatic alerts and commanded avoidance maneuvers. A final experiment found supporting automatic alerts with the explicit display of its underlying criteria resulted in more consistent subject reactions. In light of these experimental results, a general discussion of pilot non-conformance is provided. Contributing factors in pilot non-conformance include a lack of confidence in the automatic system and mismatches between the alerting system's commands and the pilots' own decisions based on the information available to them. The effects of non-conformance on system performance are discussed.