On top of your analysis of commands that might flag conflicting commands, shouldn't we also be analyzing the radar to make sure there aren't any obviously conflicting paths?
I saw your comment about pilot intentionality being the major time-saver but in a situation like the Potomac River crash, the intentionality and knowledge may have been a unintentional headfake for a system like yours i.e "Yes I see the CRJ".
Maybe it's 80-20 for you, with the Potomac situation being especially rare.
There's lots to discuss about the most recent Potomac River crash, but I'll let that rest for now.
Your general point is 100% correct. It's not enough to only do the command parsing; you have to also compare that to radar + trajectory planning to get the full picture. That's exactly what we're working on now. Fortunately, the radar piece is much more deterministic.
On top of your analysis of commands that might flag conflicting commands, shouldn't we also be analyzing the radar to make sure there aren't any obviously conflicting paths?
I saw your comment about pilot intentionality being the major time-saver but in a situation like the Potomac River crash, the intentionality and knowledge may have been a unintentional headfake for a system like yours i.e "Yes I see the CRJ".
Maybe it's 80-20 for you, with the Potomac situation being especially rare.