Cardoza, Colleen | Search NASA

NASA NTRS2016

The Cognitive Challenges of Flying a Remotely Piloted Aircraft

A large variety of Remotely Piloted Aircraft (RPA) designs are currently in production or in development. These aircraft range from small electric quadcopters that are flown close to the ground within visual range of the operator, to larger systems capable of extended flight in airspace shared with conventional aircraft. Before RPA can operate routinely and safely in civilian airspace, we need to understand the unique human factors associated with these aircraft. The task of flying an RPA in civilian airspace involves challenges common to the operation of other highly-automated systems, but also introduces new considerations for pilot perception, decision-making, and action execution. RPA pilots participated in focus groups where they were asked to recall critical incidents that either presented a threat to safety, or highlighted a case where the pilot contributed to system resilience or mission success. Ninety incidents were gathered from focus-groups. Human factor issues included the impact of reduced sensory cues, traffic separation in the absence of an out-the-window view, control latencies, vigilance during monotonous and ultra-long endurance flights, control station design considerations, transfer of control between control stations, the management of lost link procedures, and decision-making during emergencies. Some of these concerns have received significant attention in the literature, or are analogous to human factors of manned aircraft. The presentation will focus on issues that are poorly understood, and have not yet been the subject of extensive human factors study. Although many of the reported incidents were related to pilot error, the participants also provided examples of the positive contribution that humans make to the operation of highly-automated systems.

remote pilot station↗

NASA NTRS2016

C2-Related Incidents Reported by UAS Pilots

It has been estimated that aviation accidents are typically preceded by numerous minor incidents arising from the same causal factors that ultimately produced the accident. Accident databases provide in-depth information on a relatively small number of occurrences, however incident databases have the potential to provide insights into the human factors of Remotely Piloted Aircraft System (RPAS) operations based on a larger volume of less-detailed reports. Currently, there is a lack of incident data dealing with the human factors of unmanned aircraft systems. An exploratory study is being conducted to examine the feasibility of collecting voluntary critical incident reports from RPAS pilots. Twenty-three experienced RPAS pilots volunteered to participate in focus groups in which they described critical incidents from their own experience. Participants were asked to recall (1) incidents that revealed a system flaw, or (2) highlighted a case where the human operator contributed to system resilience or mission success. Participants were asked to only report incidents that could be included in a public document. During each focus group session, a note taker produced a de-identified written record of the incident narratives. At the end of the session, participants reviewed each written incident report, and made edits and corrections as necessary. The incidents were later analyzed to identify contributing factors, with a focus on design issues that either hindered or assisted the pilot during the events. A total of 90 incidents were reported. This presentation focuses on incidents that involved the management of the command and control (C2) link. The identified issues include loss of link, interference from undesired transmissions, voice latency, accidental control transfer, and the use of the lost link timer, or lost link OK features.

unmanned aircraft systems↗

NASA NTRS2016

Pilot Critical Incident Reports as a Means to Identify Human Factors of Remotely Piloted Aircraft

It has been estimated that aviation accidents are typically preceded by numerous minor incidents arising from the same causal factors that ultimately produced the accident. Accident databases provide in-depth information on a relatively small number of occurrences, however incident databases have the potential to provide insights into the human factors of Remotely Piloted Aircraft System (RPAS) operations based on a larger volume of less-detailed reports. Currently, there is a lack of incident data dealing with the human factors of unmanned aircraft systems. An exploratory study is being conducted to examine the feasibility of collecting voluntary critical incident reports from RPAS pilots. Twenty-three experienced RPAS pilots volunteered to participate in focus groups in which they described critical incidents from their own experience. Participants were asked to recall (1) incidents that revealed a system flaw, or (2) highlighted a case where the human operator contributed to system resilience or mission success. Participants were asked to only report incidents that could be included in a public document. During each focus group session, a note taker produced a de-identified written record of the incident narratives. At the end of the session, participants reviewed each written incident report, and made edits and corrections as necessary. The incidents were later analyzed to identify contributing factors, with a focus on design issues that either hindered or assisted the pilot during the events. A total of 90 incidents were reported. Human factor issues included the impact of reduced sensory cues, traffic separation in the absence of an out-the-window view, control latencies, vigilance during monotonous and ultra-long endurance flights, control station design considerations, transfer of control between control stations, the management of lost link procedures, and decision-making during emergencies. Pilots participated willingly and enthusiastically in the study, and generally had little difficulty recalling critical incidents. The results suggest that pilot interviews can be a productive method of gathering information on incidents that might not otherwise be reported. Some of the issues described in the reports have received significant attention in the literature, or are analogous to human factors of manned aircraft. In other cases, incident reports involved human factors that are poorly understood, and have not yet been the subject of extensive study. Although many of the reported incidents were related to pilot error, the participants also provided examples of the positive contribution that humans make to the operation of highly-automated systems.

unmanned aircraft systems↗

NASA NTRS2015

Identification of Human Factors in Unmanned Aviation Via Pilot Incident Reports

There is a need for incident data relevant to the operation of civilian unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) in the National Air Space (NAS). Currently, very limited incident and accident data are available from military sources, and the tightly-restricted civilian UAS industry has produced very few incident reports that could shed light on design issues relevant to human factors. An exploratory study is being conducted to examine the feasibility of collecting voluntary critical incident reports from UAS pilots, and using the information to identify areas where human factors guidelines will be of assistance. Experienced UAS pilots are participating in small focus groups in which they are prompted to describe critical incidents that either reveal a system flaw, or highlight a case where the human operator contributed to system resilience or mission success. The de-identified incidents are being analyzed to identify contributing factors, with a focus on design issues that either hindered or assisted the pilot in dealing with the incident. Preliminary findings will be described.

human factors↗

NASA NTRS2015

An Approach to Quantify Workload in a System of Agents

The role of humans in aviation and other domains continues to shift from manual control to automation monitoring. Studies have found that humans are often poorly suited for monitoring roles, and workload can easily spike in off-nominal situations. Current workload measurement tools, like NASA TLX, use human operators to assess their own workload after using a prototype system. Such measures are used late in the design process and can result in ex- pensive alterations when problems are discovered. Our goal in this work is to provide a quantitative workload measure for use early in the design process. We leverage research in human cognition to de ne metrics that can measure workload on belief-desire-intentions based multi-agent systems. These measures can alert designers to potential workload issues early in design. We demonstrate the utility of our approach by characterizing quantitative differences in the workload for a single pilot operations model compared to a traditional two pilot model.

Single Pilot Operations↗