The National Academies Press

Currently Skimming:

Pages 51-67

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.

From page 51... ... 51 The proposed evaluation process described in this chapter is appropriate for high level evaluation of AGVT for airside applications and may be analogous to the evaluation conducted during the alternatives analysis phase of the airport master planning process (FAA, AC 150/ 5070-6B, 2015; shown in Appendix F) Read the entire page →
From page 52... ... 52 Advanced Ground Vehicle Technologies for Airside Operations criteria: ease of adoption, stakeholder acceptance, technical feasibility, infrastructure impacts, operational impacts, benefits, and human factors. The evaluation is described in greater detail in the following sections. Read the entire page →
From page 53... ... Evaluation Process 53 centrally based) , and identify the level of automation (when appropriate) Read the entire page →
From page 54... ... 54 Advanced Ground Vehicle Technologies for Airside Operations Safety Risk Management includes five steps for hazard assessment: 1. Describe the system, 2. Read the entire page →
From page 55... ... Evaluation Process 55 Risks are categorized by severity and likelihood, as shown in Figure 20b. If the risks associated with the candidate project are categorized as low or medium risks, the candidate project should be considered for further evaluation and may be recommended for further development. Read the entire page →
From page 56... ... 56 Advanced Ground Vehicle Technologies for Airside Operations • Human factors. Human factors reflect the interaction between people and the proposed technology deployment. Read the entire page →
From page 57... ... Evaluation Process 57 defense industry and is determined using a technology readiness assessment (TRA) Read the entire page →
From page 58... ... 58 Advanced Ground Vehicle Technologies for Airside Operations • Capability. Does the candidate project meet the current capabilities of operation or would it increase the airport's ability to meet specific functional objectives, such as the ability to accommodate a specific aircraft or a variety of aircraft (e.g., for a candidate project focused on jet bridge automation) Read the entire page →
From page 59... ... Evaluation Process 59 1 Overall estimated TRL is compatible with candidate project • Software readiness level, hardware readiness level, integration readiness level and system readiness level are compatible with proposed application 2 Technology Adaptability and candidate technology can successfully be adapted to airside use • System adaptability, including procedure changes and training requirements • Need for additional equipment to manage AV in proximity of aircraft • Need for additional procedures for compliance with ATC and other airside protocol • Need for additional resources due to airside environment (this may include onboard power, signal connection, airline and aircraft profiles, airport profile, ATC communication phraseology database if using synthesized voice on board autonomous vehicles, etc.) 3 Technology safety and system redundancy are adequate in the event of technology failure or unexpected operating conditions. Read the entire page →
From page 60... ... 60 Advanced Ground Vehicle Technologies for Airside Operations safety, and support of institutional goals, as defined in technology forecasting (Srivastav and Misra, 2014) Read the entire page →
From page 61... ... Evaluation Process 61 1 Reflects ergonomic principles and accommodates physical attributes of users (anthropometrics and biomechanics) 2 Good computer-human interaction supports ease of use (dialogues, interfaces, and procedures across functions) Read the entire page →
From page 62... ... 62 Advanced Ground Vehicle Technologies for Airside Operations conceptual nature of some criteria components, the proposed evaluation is a mix of quantitative and qualitative information. For some AGVT applications, technologies are still evolving and there is a degree of uncertainty associated with their operation, which increases the importance of qualitative information and assessment. Read the entire page →
From page 63... ... Evaluation Process 63 risk. Such a change is likely to increase the evaluation score for criteria such as technical feasibility, ease of implementation, and stakeholder acceptance. Read the entire page →
From page 64... ... 64 Advanced Ground Vehicle Technologies for Airside Operations was considered medium risk because the airport had no experience with this technology and the technology was relatively immature, which were balanced by the facts that deployment was exclusively in remote areas far from the runways and the AV was geofenced and would stop as a fail-safe condition. Demonstration was considered low risk as the operation was exclusively in remote areas, the AV was geofenced, the AV would stop as a fail-safe condition, and the AV could be closely monitored since it was a trial of limited duration. Read the entire page →
From page 65... ... Evaluation Process 65 Do Nothing Automated perimeter security demonstration Automated perimeter security deployment Benefits 0 3 Supports institutional goals 0 3 Increase safety and reduce human exposure to health and safety hazards • Reduce worker fatigue • Reduce worker exposure to hazards • Reduce worker injuries (severity and incidence) and fatalities 0 3 N/A Compatible with staffing needs and requirements 0 9 Alternative Provides useful data to enhance current or future operations No Longer • Project will result in data or information to support future deployment Under • Improve airport situational monitoring through provision of metrics or real-time data Consideration • Provides increased oversight or better documentation of activities and events 0 0 Project provides expected cost savings (positive B/C, benefits outweigh cost) Read the entire page →
From page 66... ... 66 Advanced Ground Vehicle Technologies for Airside Operations for the candidate project. Normalized scores can be found by dividing the total score for each alternative by the highest score of any of the alternatives. Read the entire page →
From page 67... ... Evaluation Process 67 Category Characteristics Type of Service Does the airport primarily serve commercial or GA? Is the airport certificated through Part 139? Read the entire page →

From page 51...

... 51 The proposed evaluation process described in this chapter is appropriate for high level evaluation of AGVT for airside applications and may be analogous to the evaluation conducted during the alternatives analysis phase of the airport master planning process (FAA, AC 150/ 5070-6B, 2015; shown in Appendix F)