期刊文献+

平行航路安全评估新方法(英文) 被引量:1

NEW METHOD FOR SAFETY ASSESSMENT OF PARALLEL ROUTES
下载PDF
导出
摘要 首先提出了一种平行航路安全评估新方法,即从空中交通管制的安全防护体系入手,将潜在飞行冲突看作空中相撞事故的初因事件,提炼出管制员指挥、短期冲突告警、飞行员目视避让及机载防撞系统告警四层安全防护,进而将平行航路碰撞风险问题分解为潜在飞行冲突计算和各防护层的失效概率分析。然后,推导了管制员干预次数计算模型,采用CREAM方法解决了管制员调配飞行冲突失误概率计算问题,建立了STCA防护失效和TCAS防护失效故障树模型。最后,以京沪平行航路为例进行计算,得出了雷达管制环境下的京沪平行航路碰撞风险。结果表明该航路满足安全要求。 A new safety assessment method for parallel routes is presented. From the aspects of safety guard system of air traffic control(ATC) and considering the flight conflict as causing event of air collision accidents, this paper fosters a four-layer safety guard of controller command, short-term conflict alerts (STCAs), pilot visual avoidance, and traffic alert collision avoidance system(TCAS). Then, the problem of parallel routes collision risk is divided into two parts:the calculation of potential flight conflict and the analysis of failure probability of the four-layer safety guard. A calculation model for controller interference times is induced. By using cognitive reliability and error analysis method(CREAM),the calculation problem to failure probability of controller sequencing flight conflicts is solved and a fault tree model of guard failure of STCA and TCAS is established. Finally, the Beijing-Shanghai parallel routes are taken as an example to be calculated and the collision risk of the parallel routes is obtained under the condition of radar control. Results show that the parallel routes can satisfy the safety demands.
作者 隋东
出处 《Transactions of Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics》 EI 2009年第1期36-43,共8页 南京航空航天大学学报(英文版)
基金 Supported by the National High Technology Research and Development Program of China("863"Program)(2006AA12A105)~~
关键词 空中交通管制 人为因素 安全评估 短期冲突告警 机载防撞系统 air traffic control human factors safety assessment short-term conflict alerts, traffic alert collision avoidance system
  • 相关文献

参考文献10

  • 1Brooker Peter.Future air traffic management:quan-titative en route safety assessment part2—New ap-proaches[].Journal of Navigation.2002
  • 2Brooker Peter.Radar inaccuracies and mid-air colli-sion risk:Part1A dynamic methodology[].Jour-nal of Navigation.2004
  • 3Brooker Peter.Radar inaccuracies and mid-air colli-sion risk:Part2En route radar separation minima[].Journal of Navigation.2004
  • 4Ennis Rachelle Lea.Systematic analysis of aircraft separation requirements[]..2005
  • 5Hollnagel E.Cognitive reliability and error analysis method[]..1998
  • 6Hannaman G W,Spurgin A J,Lukic Y.A model for assessing human cognitive reliability[].IEEErd Conference on Human Factors and Power Plants.1985
  • 7P. G. Retch.Analysis of Long—Range Air Traffic System[].Journal of the Institute of Navigation.1966
  • 8P. G. Retch.Analysis of Long—Range Air Traffic System[].Journal of the Institute of Navigation.1966
  • 9P. G. Retch.Analysis of Long—Range Air Traffic System[].Journal of the Institute of Navigation.1966
  • 10Davis L,Sharpe A.Review of the North Atlantic lateral collision risk model[].Air Traffic Control Quarterly.1993

同被引文献18

  • 1王遥,沈祖培.CREAM——第二代人因可靠性分析方法[J].工业工程与管理,2005,10(3):17-21. 被引量:43
  • 2张兆宁,张晓燕,李冬宾.基于VOR导航的平行航路侧向碰撞率计算模型[J].交通运输工程学报,2007,7(3):21-24. 被引量:28
  • 3Final Report of RTCA Task Force 3-Free Flight Implementation[R].Washington DC:RTCA Inc,1995.
  • 4Hoekstra J M,Van Gent R N H W,Ruigrok R C J.Designing for safety:The 'free flight' air traffic management concept[J].Reliability Engineering and System Safety,2002,75(2):215-232.
  • 5Reich P G.Analysis of long-range air traffic systems:separation standards I II III[J].Journal of the Institute of Navigation,1966,19(1):88-98;1966,19(2):169-186;1966,19(3):331-347.
  • 6Cox M E,Harrison D,Moek G,et al.European studies to investigate the feasibility of using 1000ft vertical separation minima above FL290,parts I II III[J].Journal of the Institute of Navigation,1991,44(2):171-183;1992,45(1):91-106;1993,46(2):245-261.
  • 7Penna D M.Longitudinal Separation of North Atlantic Air Traffic,CAA Paper 77028[G].London:Civil Aviation Authority,CAA,1977.
  • 8Brooker P,Lloyd D E.Collision Risk and Longitudinal Separation Standards for North Atlantic Air Traffic:UK CAA DORA Communication 7801[G].Issue 2,London:CAA,1978.
  • 9Blom H A P,Bakker G J,Blanker P J G,et al.Accident risk assessment for advanced ATM[R].NLR-TP-99015.
  • 10Henk A P Blom,BakkerG J (Bert),Bart Klein Obbink,et al.Free flight safety risk modeling and simulation[R].NLR-TP-2006-290.

引证文献1

二级引证文献23

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部