Participants manually (i.e., without the autopilot) performed three times the same landing scenario according to three different conditions. The “control scenario” (CS) was a nominal landing without a supplementary task. The “easy dual task scenario” (EDTS) and the “difficult dual task scenario” (HDTS) were similar to the “control scenario” except that participants were asked to perform a supplementary monitoring task. The purpose of this supplementary task was to increase the level of visuo-attentional effort: participants had to regularly check the ND Zone in the ND screen to say aloud the value at the right time. In the “easy dual task scenario”, participants were asked to say aloud the distance between the aircraft and the airfield threshold every 0.5 Nm (information provided by a radio beacon localized near the airfield and displayed in the ND Zone, see Fig 3). In the “difficult dual task scenario”, they were asked to say aloud this distance every 0.2 Nm. The experimenter stayed in the cockpit during the entire experimentation. Each of the three-landing scenarios consisted of performing an approach/landing to Toulouse-Blagnac Airport, Runway LFBO 14R. The flight began at coordinates 1.2159° of longitude and 43.7626° of latitude. During each scenario, the participants had to comply with the same specific instructions related to the flight. In particular: to maintain a vertical speed between +500 ft/min and -800 ft/min, a speed of 130 knots, and a heading of 143° (corresponding to the Runway 14R). We choose these values because they roughly correspond to a standard landing speed with a commercial aircraft. The negative vertical speed of -800 ft/min approximately corresponds to the vertical speed at 130 kt with an angle of approach of three degrees. We defined a tolerance range in case the participant was not well stabilized on the approach slope and had to regain altitude (+500 ft/min maximum). Each landing scenario started at an altitude of 2000 ft and lasted approximately four minutes. The three scenarios were randomized across participants to avoid learning effects. Performance dependent variables were heading, vertical speed, and speed deviations. The number of omissions (i.e., the participant omitted to call out the distance) during the supplementary task was also calculated.

Overview of the ten different AOIs: (1) Attitude indicator, (2) Speed tape, (3) Vertical speed tape, (4) Flight mode annunciator, (5) Heading tape, (6) Navigation display, (7) ND zone (displays the distance to recall during the two landing scenarios with the supplementary task), (8) Flight control unit, (9) Electronic centralized aircraft monitoring, (10) Out of the window.

Note: The content above has been extracted from a research article, so it may not display correctly.

Please log in to submit your questions online.
Your question will be posted on the Bio-101 website. We will send your questions to the authors of this protocol and Bio-protocol community members who are experienced with this method. you will be informed using the email address associated with your Bio-protocol account.

We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. By using our website, you are agreeing to allow the storage of cookies on your computer.