Airfield signage and lighting perception under cognitive load

Abstract

Surface operations are safety–critical: pilots must integrate taxi control, external scanning, radio communications and route compliance in a visually complex environment. Aerodrome markings, signs and lighting are internationally standardised, yet runway incursions and surface navigation errors persist, with pilot deviations frequently reported in safety reviews. This study treats aerodrome visual aids as a human–system interface and examines how pilots report perceiving and using colour, shape and lighting cues under varying cognitive load. An anonymous cross-sectional survey of 105 aviation professionals (76% airline pilots) captured Likert-scale ratings on cue salience, workload (time pressure, low visibility, fatigue) and self-reported hesitation/confusion during taxi or runway crossing. High-contrast colours were rated as highly salient (91% agreement) and yellow markings as attention-capturing (87%). Workload-related items correlated moderately with reported hesitation and confusion (

0.34–0.45,

p less than 0.001 p < 0.001 $p\lt 0.001$

). Participants strongly agreed that improvements to visual and lighting design could enhance safety (91%). Results are interpreted through attention and working-memory models and positioned as exploratory insights rather than causal evidence of safety benefit. The paper proposes a staged research agenda – from controlled perception tests to simulator and field validation – to support workload-resilient aerodrome visual-aid design.