Share:


Developed criteria to improve pilot reporting of airplane vortex encounters

    Aziz Al-Mahadin   Affiliation
    ; Serdar Dalkilic   Affiliation

Abstract

Leading airplane vortices can be hazardous to following airplanes. The regulated minimum separations between following and leading airplanes are sometimes overjudged, hence causing reduction in the capacity of airports. In other instances, they are underjudged and subsequently causing airplane incidences. A vital contribution to the establishment and adjustment of vortex-related minimum airplane separations rely on the identification of vortex encounters through pilot reporting with a manual analysis of flight data from FDRs (flight data recorders). This current process relies on judgment of both the pilot and the airline analysist. Hence, it is subjective and sometimes lacks the required accuracy. Therefore, it is desirable to set a number of criteria, which can be utilized to evaluate the accuracy of wake vortex encounter identification. These criteria can save time, and are both accurate and simple. This study investigates 54 pilot reports of flight events to establish a set of criteria that enable concerned aviation organizations to confirm airplane vortex encounters with higher accuracy. This also helps airlines and aviation stakeholders to introduce new regulations and enhancements such as pilots and FDR analysts training on vortex identification. Such measures will enhance safety, improve aviation operation efficiency and allow revision of vortex-separation regulations.


First published online 27 February 2020

Keyword : pilot reporting, flight events, identification of wake vortex encounter, flight data, flight data recorders (FDRs), wake vortex separation distance

How to Cite
Al-Mahadin, A., & Dalkilic, S. (2019). Developed criteria to improve pilot reporting of airplane vortex encounters. Aviation, 23(4), 133-142. https://doi.org/10.3846/aviation.2019.12038
Published in Issue
Dec 31, 2019
Abstract Views
893
PDF Downloads
256
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

References

Aircraft wake vortex state-of-the-art & research needs. (2015). WakeNet3-Europe EC Grant Agreement No. ACS7-GA-2008-213462.

Al-Mahadin, A., & Bouslama, F. (2017). Automatic identification of wake vortex traverse by transport aircraft using fuzzy logic. Proceedings of the IEEE 4th ISCMI (pp. 133–139). Port Louis, Mauritius. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISCMI.2017.8279613

Al-Mahadin, A., & Bouslama, F. (2018). Neuro-Fuzzy techniques for the identification of aircraft wake vortex encounters. Proceedings of ASET 2018. Dubai, UAE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICASET.2018.8376808

Al-Mahadin, A., & Bouslama, F. (2019a). Airplane vortex encounters identification using multilayer feed-forward neural networks. International Journal of Machine Learning and Computing (IJMLC), 9(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijmlc.2019.9.1.1-7

Al-Mahadin, A., & Bouslama, F. (2019b). Recognition of airplane wing-tip vortices encounters using neural networks. International Journal of Machine Learning and Computing (IJMLC), 9(2), 115–120. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijmlc.2019.9.2.774

Chernyshev, S., Gaifullin, A., & Sviridenko, Y. (2014). Civil aircraft vortex wake. Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 71, 150–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paerosci.2014.06.004

Critchley, J., & Foot, P. (1991). United Kingdom civil aviation authority wake vortex database: analysis of incidents reported between 1982 and 1990. London, UK.

Current market outlook 2012–2031. (2012). The Boeing Company, Seattle, USA.

Flight Data Services. (2017). FDM/FOQA services: a proactive approach to safety. https://www.flightdataservices.com/fdm-foqa-services/flight-data analysis

Global market forecast 2012–2031. (2012). Airbus S.A.S., Cedex, France.

Haslbeck, C., Schmidt, M., & Schubert, E. (2015). Pilots’ willingness to report aviation incidents. Researchgate, conference paper.

Hinton, D. (1997). Aircraft vortex spacing system (AVOSS) concept and development; CP-97-206235 (ed.), Proceedings of the NASA first wake vortex dynamic spacing workshop. Langley Research Centre, Hamton, VA, USA.

Höhne, G., Fuhrmann, M., & Luckner, R. (2004). Critical wake vortex encounter scenarios. Airbus Deutschland GmbH, Kreetslag 10, 21129, Hamburg, Germany. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2004.07.005

Holzäpfel, F., & Stephan, A. (2016). Wind impact on single vortices and counterrotating vortex pairs in ground proximity. Flow, Turbulence and Combustion, 97, 829–848. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10494-016-9729-2

Huang, M. (2015). A review of wind tunnel based virtual flight testing techniques for evaluation of flight control systems. International Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 2015(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/672423

Huang, M., Zhang, Z., & Cui G. (2017). Numerical study of aircraft wake vortex evolution near ground in stable atmospheric boundary layer. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 30(6), 1866–1876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cja.2017.08.012

Jategaonkar, R. (1997). Identification of speed brake, air-drop and landing gear effects from flight data. Journal of Aircraft, 34(2), 174–180. https://doi.org/10.2514/2.2169

Safety and flight operations: loss of control in-flight accident analysis. (2015). International Air Transport Association (IATA), Montreal, Canada.

Sammonds, R., Stinnett, G., & Larsen, W. (1976). Wake vortex encounter hazard criteria for two aircraft classes. NASA TM X-73, 113, FAA-RD-75-206.

Schwarz, C., & Hahn, K. (2011). Automated pilot assistance for wake vortex encounters. Aerospace Science and Technology, 15, 416–421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2010.09.008

Singh, J. (1995). Identification of lateral-directional behaviour in stall from flight data. Journal of Aircraft, 33(3), 627–630. https://doi.org/10.2514/3.46993

Sölch, I., Holzäpfel, F.delmoula, F., & Vechtel, D. (2016). Performance of on-board wake vortex prediction systems employing various meteorological data sources. Journal of Aircraft, 53, 1505–1516. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.C033732

Stewart, E. (1998). A piloted simulation study of wake turbulence on final approach. AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference and Exhibit. Boston, Massachusetts, USA, AIAA 98-4339. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1998-4339

Vortex avoidance procedures. (2017). Official guide to basic flight information and ATC Procedures, Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM).

Wake turbulence (2015). Civil Aviation Authority, NATS services. Aeronautical Information Circular p001/2015, United Kingdom.

Woodfield, A. (1996). Analysis of flight data records of reported wake vortex encounters. Woodfield aviation research.

Woodfield, A. (1998). Automatic identification of wake vortex encounters from flight data records. Woodfield aviation research.

Woodfield, A. (1999). En-route encounters with wake vortices, and the implications of reduced vertical separation minima (RVSM). Woodfield Aviation Research, report no. 9901.

Yu, Y., & Zhang, Y. (2018). Safe control of trailing UAV in close formation flight against actuator fault and wake vortex effect. Aerospace Science and Technology, 77, 189–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2018.01.028