Carl Westin

118 Consistency and agreement in conflict resolution T ABLE 6-1: Conflict resolution strategies (after Fothergill et al. 24 ) Lateral resolution strategies 1. Vector aircraft behind other (“point behind”). 2. Vector away from potential conflicts (“take out”). 3. Assign a track parallel with own route. 4. Take out for five miles, then put back on track. 5. Vector aircraft ahead of other (“pass in front”). Vertical resolution strategies 6. Cut off at nearest available level on climb. 7. Cut off at highest possible level on climb. 8. Request nearest level above conflicting aircraft. 9. Descend to nearest available level. 10. Assign the only level available. 11. Step climb/descent. 12. Expedite climb/descent. 13. Report maintaining to ensure at least 1000 feet separation. and vectoring the aircraft farthest away from a crossing point behind the aircraft closer to the crossing point. Furthermore, research suggests that controllers cope with high workload, fatigue, and effects of age by using risk-averse strategies that are more conservative, involve early intervention, and resolve situations directly (in contrast to a wait-and-see strategy). 40, 80, 189 More recently, Fothergill et al. 24 identified thirteen conflict resolution strategies and tied these to specific resolutions. The strategies are shown in Table 6-1, divided into five lateral and eight vertical ones in no special order. The authors identified the two most common strategies as cutting of a climbing aircraft at the nearest available level (vertical conflicts) and vectoring one aircraft behind the other (crossing con- flicts). Both are described as quick and easy, ’ “set and forget” strategies, because they can be achieved by one instruction and require less monitoring. In contrast, the less common strategy of vectoring one aircraft ahead of another is deemed con- siderably riskier and demanding to calculate and monitor. Ultimately, the authors concluded that strategy choice is individual and highly dependent on the conflict detection process and perceived situation complexity.