This paper presents an air/ground functional allocation experiment conducted by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) using two human-in-the-Loop simulations to compare airborne and ground-based approaches to NextGen separation assurance. The approaches under investigation are two trajectory-based four-dimensional (4D) concepts; one referred to as "airborne trajectory management with self-separation" (airborne) the other as "ground-based automated separation assurance" (ground-based). In coordinated simulations at NASA's Ames and Langley Research Centers, the primary operational participants -controllers for the ground-based concept and pilots for the airborne concept - manage the same traffic scenario using the two different 4D concepts. The common scenarios are anchored in traffic problems that require a significant increase in airspace capacity - on average, double, and in some local areas, close to 250% over current day levels - in order to enable aircraft to safely and efficiently traverse the test airspace. The simulations vary common independent variables such as traffic density, sequencing and scheduling constraints, and timing of trajectory change events. A set of common metrics is collected to enable a direct comparison of relevant results. The simulations will be conducted in spring 2010. If accepted, this paper will be the first publication of the experimental approach and early results. An initial comparison of safety and efficiency as well as operator acceptability under the two concepts is expected
