Automated Aircraft Collision Avoidance via Separation Perimeter
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current aircraft collision avoidance systems rely on human intervention, which can lead to errors due to factors like fatigue and stress, and are inadequate in high-traffic conditions, as they require pilots to exchange and perform escape maneuvers, potentially leading to further collision risks.
Innovation Solution
An automated vehicle-centric collision avoidance system that predicts the closest point of approach between aircraft and alters flight trajectories to maintain a predefined separation perimeter, reducing the need for human intervention and minimizing the risk of collisions.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If human air traffic controllers and pilots are used for collision avoidance, then the system can operate with existing technology and procedures, but human errors due to fatigue, stress, or lack of experience reduce reliability
Solution Approach 1:
The aircraft collision avoidance system performs collision detection and escape maneuver selection autonomously without requiring human intervention. The system monitors its own flight path, detects potential collisions with other aircraft, and automatically executes escape maneuvers, enabling the aircraft to serve its own safety needs
Solution Approach 2:
The patent replaces the mechanical human decision-making process with an automated electronic system that calculates closest point of approach, determines collision risk, and selects escape maneuvers based on pre-programmed logic and algorithms, eliminating human factors such as fatigue and stress from the collision avoidance process
2Productivity
If pilots rely on situational awareness and air traffic controller instructions for collision avoidance, then the system can function with current operational procedures, but the ability to avoid collisions is limited by human capacity and communication delays
Solution Approach 1:
The automated collision avoidance system continuously monitors the flight path and positions of surrounding aircraft without interruption, maintaining constant awareness of potential collision risks rather than relying on periodic updates or human attention, enabling uninterrupted safety monitoring
Solution Approach 2:
The system receives real-time position and trajectory data from other aircraft via transponders, processes this feedback information to calculate closest point of approach and collision risk, and continuously adjusts escape maneuver selections based on the evolving situational data, creating a closed-loop safety system
3Reliability
If TCAS alerts pilots of potential flight path conflicts, then collision awareness is improved, but effective avoidance depends on pilot exchange of escape maneuver intentions and execution, which may be incompatible with other air traffic
Solution Approach 1:
The aircraft's collision avoidance system autonomously determines and executes escape maneuvers without requiring pilot action or coordination with other pilots, with the system serving its own collision avoidance needs by automatically selecting and implementing the appropriate escape direction based on real-time conflict analysis
Solution Approach 2:
The system pre-calculates multiple potential escape maneuvers and their compatibility with other air traffic before a collision becomes imminent, selecting the optimal escape path in advance rather than requiring last-minute pilot decisions, thereby reducing coordination complexity and response time
4Reliability
If ground-based air traffic control systems direct aircraft separations, then collision avoidance is achieved through centralized control, but the workload of air traffic controllers increases in heavy air traffic conditions
Solution Approach 1:
Each aircraft's collision avoidance system independently monitors and manages its own separation from other aircraft, eliminating the need for continuous ground controller intervention in separation decisions, thereby reducing controller workload while maintaining reliable separation control
Solution Approach 2:
The centralized air traffic control function is segmented and distributed to individual aircraft, with each aircraft's collision avoidance system handling its own separation responsibilities rather than relying on a single ground-based controller to manage all separations, thereby distributing the operational burden
Data Source
AI summary
Systems and methods for providing vehicle-centric collision avoidance are disclosed. An example method includes determining a first flight trajectory for a first aircraft, determining a second flight trajectory for a second aircraft, predicting a distance between the first aircraft and the second aircraft at a predicted closest point of approach based on the first and second flight trajectories, comparing the distance to a separation perimeter layer, the separation perimeter layer configured to provide a minimum separation distance from the first aircraft to the second aircraft, and altering the first flight trajectory when the distance breaches the separation perimeter layer.