Flight Deck Interval Management 

Introduction

Flight deck interval management is an important part of aviation and aeronautics. It forms the spine on which the aviation industry rests upon. Defining flight deck interval management is difficult. The difficulty in its definition stems from the fact that the term is not in itself a single definition of a single concept (Penhallegon, W. et.al. 2011). It is in essence a blanket term that covers not only a process in aviation but a set of procedures, processes and mechanisms. It is used in aeronautical lingo to act as the unifying description for the many intricate duties, responsibilities and roles in air traffic control. It is however summarized as the set of procedures and skills used all together by personnel and flight crew. These skills are applied in the management of spacing between aircraft traffic and instream traffic to ensure efficiency. 

Such skills are applied in not only the day to day running of airports and flight management but in charting routes to ensure an endearing means to order. It is therefore important that flight deck interval management be regulated, standardized and monitored to ensure that there is harmonization and much needed order. As a result of the great necessity for order and harmony, this report shall seek to discuss the concept of flight deck management. It shall do so by first tracing its historical development, assessing its merits and demerits and looking into the current regulatory framework. Furthermore, this report shall highlight the legal issues for consideration in the use of such technology. 

Historical Background

The need to use technology has always inspired the development and invention of new techniques and modes of making work easier. In air travel, early aviators did not enjoy the privilege to apply a wide array of technology based on the fact that first, the industry was relatively young and resources were limited and second, there were few aircrafts in the air. Hence, the lack of many players in the commercial air travel led to a relatively slow progress in aeronautical innovation. However, with the increase of both commercial air travel and growth in air traffic, it became important to develop a means to space airplanes arriving in various runways (Swieringa, K. et.al, 2017).

The developments in air travel called upon the input of various players in the aviation industry. In the late 1990’s the National Aeronautics and Space Administration carried out research to establish possibility of interval management (Neogi, N., et.al. 2012). Being a relatively early attempt, the bulk of their research was based on the ability of flight crews to carry out spacing between flights on their respective terminals (Abbott, T. & Moen, G. 1981).  Thus, the development of interval management started on a small-scale level limited to in-trail interval spacing based on the terminal’s general surroundings. The initial tests were also guided by observational skills acquired in basic aviation training.

The initial skills and concepts were termed as the Approach Spacing for Instrument Approach (ASIA) and Paired Approach (PA). These formed the initial forms of interval spacing and guided the pilot projects. The former was developed to apply in cases where there was a single runway and or terminal and the later was applied in cases of closely spaced aircrafts.

These were relatively primitive tests but did form the basic blue print that would guide future developments. NASA continued to carry out more pilot projects and tests into the early 2000’s by which time other stakeholders came on board. A notable inclusion is the carrying out of such projects in Ohio at Wilmington where the Air Express formed part of its first evaluation. Later on, the skills were tested in the Louisville Airport. Here the test went as far as evaluating the initial and final spacing intervals and how both the ASIA and PA could function (Bone, R., et.al, 2000). 

Later on, there was need to improve on the ASIA and the PA. This was based on the notable findings made as a result of research and the evaluations made in the early 2000’s. Thus, the Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADSB) was developed in late 2003. This was a notable step as it sought to create a more automatic and efficient approach to interval management using technology both in the cockpit and in watchtowers. 

The improvement was later implemented in a two-step action plan. This action plan in truth paved the way for modern interval management. It has been improved to include considerations on flight speed and flight sequences (Penhallegon, W. et.al. 2011). More recent changes were made in 2008 which looked at the regulation of spacing in aircrafts that share a route and see where the merger comes in. This was seen as a move to better understand and cater for overlaps and confusion brought about by the same.

Assessing the pros and cons of flight deck interval management 

Flight deck interval management has differing results and impacts. This section of the paper shall look at the various advantages and disadvantages occasioned by the flight deck interval management skills and techniques on air travel and aviation as a whole.

Advantages of flight deck interval management 

First, it is consistent. Consistency here is brought about by the fact that there are few variations between modes and changing circumstances. This is based on the fact that the interval management’s historical background as seen above was based on universal concepts of observation known to aviators. Also, the interval management in in its development did not only engage various players in the scientific and aeronautical sector but also other countries. In its development the concepts were aided with input from practice in the United Kingdom and intergovernmental agencies like the International Civil Aviation Organisation (Penhallegon, W. et.al. 2011).

Second, the flight deck management is effective in the control and management of high-density air traffic. Aviators have attributed the ease in management of air traffic to the interval management system. Moreover, based on the improvements and notable impacts on the aviation industry, the interval management has led to an improvement of how high-density airports and terminals deal with aircrafts. These merits could be attributed to the considerable improvements in 2008 which saw the introduction of route mergers. Therefore, the flight attendants and watchtowers have an easier job when swamped with aircrafts on a busy day (Barmore, B., et.al. 2016). 

Third, the flight deck interval management has led to an expediated airline system. The improvement in the ease of managing air traffic has led to fewer delays. The system has led to smooth running of air crafts which arrive on the runway on time and leave on time. There is little to no confusion as to which aircraft lands and as to the timing. This is as a result of improvements in the considerations applied. The flight deck interval management takes into account a large number of issues that affect air travel and cause confusion hence, there are few delays (Koh, C. 2019).

Disadvantages of flight deck interval management

The problem with the flight interval management is how it is perceived and applied by the airmen. It is noted that pilots rely less on the mechanisms in flight deck interval management. Thus, there is some rigidity in how the pilots view interval management. Few freely engage with new forms of technology and heavily rely on the terminal interval management (Bone, R., et.al, 2000). This is a problem because as far as “flight deck” management is concerned, pilots seem to have no need or great difficulty in adapting to the flight deck interval management equipment. Therefore, one can argue that the flight deck interval management is difficult in its application and is difficult to adapt to (Penhallegon, W., & Bone, R., 2008). 

Regulation of flight deck interval management.

The issue of who in fact manages the flight deck interval management is not limited to one body but more of many bodies regulating specific parts of the flight deck intervals. Aircrafts and aviation are generally regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The FAA was key in the formulation of interval management and still carries out essential regulation and oversight on interval management as far as air travel is concerned. It does so through a time allocation management system. The allocation of time is important to the issue in interval management. Thus, time allocation should be informed to the FAA (Ibrahim, Linda, et al. 2001).

The from an international point of view the International Civil Aviation Organisation requires that the states at Chapter III of the Chicago Convention provides for the need to register nationality and routes. A key issue in interval management (Abeyratne, R. 2014). It hence, regulates interval management to that extent on the international scene.

Legal issues arising out of flight deck interval management

As earlier alluded to, there is need to carry out regulation of interval management. As is the case in many sectors of life and commerce, there are legal issues in interval management. These issues arise from the binding legal framework in place and whether there is a substantial deviation from the same. 

The first legal issue is the issue of certification. When dealing with the issue of certification the issue does not involve certification of air routes alone, but is wide to include the registration and certification of interval management mechanisms. From this standpoint the interval mechanisms should meet a list of detailed requirements under law so that they are certified as acceptable and legal. 

Moreover, the issues arising from the proof-of-concept flight test. This was an issue arising out of the need to prove that there was a flight test (). It serves two purposes, first the need to ensure that what is applied has been verified and tested, and second, to ensure that there is proof the capacity and capability of an interval management. The failure to flight test is an offence and hence there is need to prove the flight test concepts applied (Ponce v. SEC, 2003). It is an important consideration not only in the case of interval management but also, licensing and certification (SEH v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 2018).

Conclusion

The use of technology is very essential in day-to-day life. It makes work easier and reduces constrains in everyday tasks. The introduction of technology and ongoing research into aviation does not only make it safer for those who rely on aircrafts but also eases the burden on the people working within the industry. The flight desk interval management system is meant to make air travel fast, efficient and safe by reducing congestion on terminals. It does have some problems and issues and the same should solve as areas for review, reform and improvement.

 

References 

Friedberg, W., et.al. (1999). Guidelines and technical information provided by the US Federal Aviation Administration to promote radiation safety for air carrier crew members. Radiation Protection Dosimetry, 86(4), 323-327.

Neogi, N., et.al. (2012). Comparison of aircraft models and integration schemes for interval management in the tracon. In 2012 IEEE/AIAA 31st Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC) (pp. 9E2-1). IEEE.

Abeyratne, R. (2014). Convention on International Civil Aviation. Springer.

Ibrahim, Linda, et al. (2001). “The Federal Aviation Administration Integrated Capability Maturity Model (FAA-iCMM), Version 2.0: An Integrated Capability Maturity Model for Enterprise-wide Improvement. US Federal Aviation Administration.” 

Abbott, T. S., & Moen, G. C. (1981). Effect of Display Size on Utilization of Traffic Situation Display for Self-Spacing Task. National Aeronautics And Space Administration Hampton Va Langley Research Center.

Swieringa, K. et.al, (2017). Flight test evaluation of the ATD-1 interval management application. In 17th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference (p. 4094).

Bone, R., et.al, (2000). Paired approach: A closely spaced parallel runway approach concept. Federal Aviation Administration, Washington, DC.

Penhallegon, W. et.al. (2011). Flight deck-based interval management-spacing during departures: Flight crew human-in-The-loop simulation. In Proceedings of the Ninth USA/Europe Air Traffic Management Research and Development Seminar (ATM2011), Berlin, Germany.

Barmore, B., et.al. (2016). Interval management: development and implementation of an airborne spacing concept. In AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference (p. 1608).

Koh, C. (2019). Development of an algorithm for correlation of aircraft positioning data from radar and ADS-B sensors/Koh Che Hun (Doctoral dissertation, University of Malaya).

Penhallegon, W., & Bone, R. (2008). Flight deck-based merging and spacing impact on flight crew operations during continuous descent arrivals and approaches. In 2008 IEEE/AIAA 27th Digital Avionics Systems Conference (pp. 3-C). IEEE.

SEH v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, No. 15-260V (Fed. Cl. Dec. 20, 2018).

Ponce v. SEC, 345 F.3d 722 (9th Cir. 2003).

At Legal writing experts, we would be happy to assist in preparing any legal document you need. We are international lawyers and attorneys with significant experience in legal drafting, Commercial-Corporate practice and consulting. In the last few years, we have successfully undertaken similar assignments for clients from different jurisdictions. If given this opportunity, we will be able to prepare the legal document within the shortest time possible.