Previous research on conflict resolution using cockpit displays of traffic information (CDTIs) has shown inconsistent findings regarding preference of conflict resolution maneuvers, perhaps attributable to inherent ambiguities in three-dimensional (3-D) perspective displays and/or a limited range of conflict geometries. This paper describes two experiments that were conducted to explore the effects of display dimensionality, conflict geometry, and time pressure on pilot maneuvering preferences for resolving en route conflicts. General aviation pilots resolved predicted conflicts using CDTIs with three levels of display dimensionality; the first had two 2-D orthogonal views, the second depicted the airspace in two alternating 3-D perspective views, and the third had a pilot-controlled swiveling viewpoint. Results showed that pilots demonstrated the same preferences that have been observed in previous research for vertical over lateral maneuvers in low workload and climbs over descents for level-flight conflicts. With increasing workload the two 3-D perspective displays, but not the 2-D displays, resulted in an increased preference for lateral over vertical maneuvers. Increased time pressure resulted in increased vertical maneuvers for the two 3-D perspective displays. The current study suggests that strategic resolution maneuver preference may not be affected in the same way or by the same factors as is tactical maneuvering. Pilots in this study exhibited fewer display ambiguity effects and milder preferences for single over combinational maneuvers and vertical over lateral maneuvers than were observed in tactical-paradigm studies.
Samenvatting