Glasgow Caledonian University Implementing NextGen Systems Discussion HW Case Analysis Response/Defense After receiving your peer review feedback, you wil

Glasgow Caledonian University Implementing NextGen Systems Discussion HW Case Analysis Response/Defense

After receiving your peer review feedback, you will then have the opportunity to respond and/or constructively defend your case analysis in a rebuttal. ((( See the Case Analysis Response/Defense Guidelines linked below for response/defense requirements ))).

( Successful responses ) reflect high levels of the following:

Good use of peer review feedback.
Response either maintains/defend the original position and provides further information/explanation or continues with concept(s) given in the review and re-approaches the analysis.
You stayed within the word limitation of roughly 200 words.
A bulleted list is used to address your original position.

I will upload these files to you: 1/ My case analysis. 2/ The peer review feedback about my case analysis. 3/ Case Analysis Response/Defense Guidelines linked below for response/defense requirements.

I want you to respond to the Peer Review with approximately 200 words.

I have attached these files to you first, you must read the assignment above and then read guidelines then read the Peer Review then read my case analysis. Finally, write Case Analysis Response/Defense. Once your case analysis is reviewed by a fellow student, you have the task of
reading, consuming, and responding to their assessment. You will find this same
process in the work environment. When project feedback is given it can help to refine
your work, or verify your intended direction. Your ability to take this review with an
open mind, as a professional, and with thick skin will help you on the job. The
process of review and defense is just as valuable a learning opportunity as the case
analysis assignment.
Your response/defense is not meant to be a visceral reply, or awkward moment.
Responses can be steadfast on maintaining the original position, but with further
explanation to continue the analysis. Here is also a great opportunity to perhaps
reword or re-approach one or more aspects of your original case analysis, and make
it better. Address these thoughts in a bullet list and do not return a rewritten
paper.
Most important is that you understand you will be graded on how you use peer review
feedback and your ideas to further the analysis in your response. Not just standing
your ground and saying it well, but backing yourself up with applicable references. As
with the peer review, if you respond from a countering position or are furthering the
analysis, ensure citations are present with references at the end.
Response/Defense Student Responsibilities
Readdress the logic chosen to conduct your CA, and add clarity if necessary.
1. Good use of peer review feedback.
2. Response either maintains the original position (supports the original position,
using sources), and provides further information/explanation or continues with
concept(s) given in the review and re-approaches the analysis.
3. The student stays within the word limitation of roughly 200 words.
4. A bulleted list is used to address your original position.
Overall, this was a great read! However, I do have some comments in reference to
content. It seems like examples of the current ATC technology is missing from the
summary. Including one or two examples of current technology will help the reader
understand the NextGen advancements. A current technology in use is terminal
Doppler weather radar (TDWR) which can detect microbursts and wind shear
(Roggow, 2020). The problem and significance statements lacked in-text citations, but
the content was relative to the rubric. When looking at your alternative actions,
citations are lacking. For the alternative action 1’s disadvantage, a citation from a
website in regards to cost could be utilized. For example, Flying Magazine states that
an ADS-B system can cost around $100,000 or more just to install on an old jet. The
recommendation given at the end of the case analysis feels inconsistent and out of
place since risk analysis tools are not mentioned previously in the analysis. A
different approach could be using the recommendation of risk analysis tools as an
alternative action. Replacing alternative action 1 with risk analysis tools will keep
consistency in your recommendation and your alternative actions since alternative
action 2 is related to human-technology interactions.
References:
Flying Magazine. (2018, June 11). Countdown to ADS-B Compliance. Retrieved July
04, 2020, from https://www.flyingmag.com/countdown-to-ads-b-compliance/ (Links
to an external site.)
Roggow, B. (2020). ATC Technology [PPT Slides 7, 9]. Embry-Riddle Aeronautical
University. Retrieved July 04, 2020, from
https://erau.instructure.com/courses/114111/files/22310466/download?wrap=1
Topic: Next Generation ATC Systems and Projected Impacts
1
Summary
Next Generation Air Transportation system as an initiative under the FAA is an interagency effort to transition the US Airspace to a safer, efficient, and dependable air transport
system by the year 2025. The FAA has proposed significant improvements for NextGen in
areas such as navigation, communication, automation, surveillance, and weather (GAO,
2017). Some facets of the proposed system have been implemented like ADS-B functions,
which have enhanced automation of many air traffic control facilities by making traffic and
weather broadcast data accessible (FAA, 2019). However, Performance Based Navigation –
which is a satellite-based system – has not been implemented fully as radar-based traffic
control systems are still in use. Presently, both commercial and general aviation pilots have
moved to embrace ADS-B technology as it offers more reliability and accuracy in tracking
aircraft on the ground and during flights.
Problem
The new technology is expected to resolve problems in human-automation interaction
for improved visibility for NAS, communication and navigation. One of the major issues
addressed is eliminating the confusion over whether it is the computer or a human operator
who has control over different stages of a flight. NextGen technology also addresses delays
and distractions occasioned by using voice communication mediums rather than data-link
(GAO, 2017). Control instability is another major problem resulting from time-sharing of
attention by air traffic controllers. Besides, the robustness of air transport systems, their
reliability or trust by operators for many computer-based decision tools is addressed in the
new technology.
Significance of the Problem
Topic: Next Generation ATC Systems and Projected Impacts
2
Confusions in human-automation interactions can result in grave consequences such
as an airplane deviating from a trajectory due to mix-ups in negotiations over 3D and 4D
trajectories. If the monitoring air traffic controllers or the flight crew misses a detail due to
either medical emergencies or the weather, catastrophic incidences could happen. Delays and
interruptions in communication also pose a safety threat, as the human operators do not know
whether to use explicitly requested information – voice communication mediums – or to use
the network data displayed for them. Control instabilities result in poor aircraft control
causing close-looped delays (Joma, 2017). This is because of the time-sharing attention of air
traffic controllers as they attempt to breakdown complex sets of data for decision making.
Many safety issues like airplane separation violations and runway incursions might go
undocumented, but ATC encourages a safety culture. Together with NextGen, the future of
ATC will ensure that near-miss situations or errors are recognized and reported.
Alternative Actions
Alternative Action 1:
NextGen systems should be implemented while considering the best current
approaches to make them resilient even with unexpected circumstances.
Advantages
Implementation will be more adaptive, preventing any perturbations to the whole air
transport system in case of accidents in the early stages of implementation. Also, since
aircraft and their subsystems are interconnected, it would be convenient to use computerbased decision support tools.
Disadvantages
Topic: Next Generation ATC Systems and Projected Impacts
3
The downside is that such an implementation has a considerable cost implication and
technological complexity which is a problem with limited funding.
Alternative Action 2:
Human automation interactions are responsible for most system failures and
accidents; thus, operators should be trained on the proper and effective implementation of
procedures (Schroeder, 2016).
Advantages
With better trained human operators, NextGen systems will experience less
operational and maintenance problems. Monitoring air traffic controllers or the flight crew
will be more responsive to detail, reducing catastrophic incidences while improving safety.
Disadvantages
A significant setback might be that the training requires funds which could negatively
affect cash strapped airlines. Setting funds aside for training air traffic controllers and flight
crew may limit investments in other areas.
Recommendations
Standard risk analysis tools should, however, be used before implementing large scale
projects like NexGen systems for airlines. Tools like event trees and fault trees or systematic
means like ATHEANA and SHARP can also be used in pointing out weaknesses that might
exist in human-technology interactions (Hahn, 2014).
References
FAA. (2019, March 11). New technology. Retrieved July 2, 2020, from
https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/how_nextgen_works/new_technology/
Topic: Next Generation ATC Systems and Projected Impacts
4
GAO. (2017). AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL MODERNIZATION: Progress and Challenges in
Implementing NextGen. United States Government Accountability Office, 1-58.
Retrieved from https://www.gao.gov/assets/690/686881.pdf
Hahn, H. (2014). The action characterisation matrix: A link between HERA (Human events
reference for ATHEANA) and ATHEANA (a technique for human error analysis).
Joma, P. G. (2017). Human-machine interactions with future flight deck and air traffic
control systems. Engineering Psychology and Cognitive Ergonomics, 151-173.
Schroeder, J. A. (2016). Upset Prevention and Recovery Training-A Regulator Update.
In AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference (p. 1429).

Purchase answer to see full
attachment