Engineering topics

Hubbs, Clay E.

Publications and source records attributed to Hubbs, Clay E..

12 records

NASA NTRS2019

Air Traffic Management Technology Demonstration-1 (ATD-1) Avionics Phase 2 Flight Test Training for Interval Management

Prior to the successful flight test validation of a new avionics prototype, participants from Boeing, Honeywell, and United Airlines underwent group training at NASA Langley Research Center. New prototype software for an algorithm which enables greater efficiency in high-density airspace, called Interval Management, was to be incorporated into Electronic Flight Bags and placed in the cockpit for pilot usage. The goals of the training were to teach the flight test pilots how to operate the new software, establish techniques to simultaneously position three aircraft prior to each test scenario, and ensure a common communication protocol among team members when coordinating the position of aircraft for the next scenario. The multi-tiered interactive training regimen consisted of a process that continually built upon previous foundational material. The primary learning elements were 1) a portable computer-based trainer that was provided to the pilots prior to classroom training sessions, 2) classroom learning, 3) full mock-up simulator training, and 4) refresher training just prior to the flight test. Each part of the regimen was designed to repeat and build upon the previous element. The purpose of this Technical Memorandum is to inform the aviation industry how flight training for Interval Management was conducted at Langley Research Center in order to reduce overall development costs of future Interval Management training programs. Secondly, the paper provides insight regarding the decision-making process when attempting to conduct a flight test.

Roper, Roy D.↗

NASA NTRS2018

Air Traffic Management Technology Demostration-1 (ATD-1) Avionics Phase 2 Flight Test and Results

NASA’s first Air Traffic Management Technology Demonstration (ATD-1) subproject successfully completed 19 days of flight test validation in January and February 2017 of an Interval Management (IM) avionics prototype and the procedures used to conduct IM arrival and approach operations. IM is one of the three elements integrated into NASA’s ATD-1 concept of operations with the subproject goal of improving aircraft efficiency and airport throughput during high-density arrival operations. The ATD-1 concept of operations combines advanced arrival scheduling, controller decision support tools, and interval management (IM) avionics to enable merging of multiple, time-based, efficient arrival streams. IM contributes to the operation by calculating speeds that enable an aircraft to precisely achieve a specific time or distance behind another aircraft. When precise spacing intervals can be calculated, achieved, and then maintained during high-density operations, aircraft efficiency should be improved by enabling the aircraft to remain closer to the optimum descent trajectory instead of using vectors and step-down altitudes, and airport throughput should be maintained or improved by each aircraft arriving at the runway threshold closer to the assigned spacing interval. This avionics development and flight test was conducted under a NASA contract by Boeing Research and Technology, with Boeing Commercial Aircraft, Honeywell, United Airlines, and Jeppesen as sub-contractors. The Honeywell built IM avionics were the first ever prototype built based on NASA requirements as well as developing and non-flight tested international IM standards, integrated into two test aircraft, and then flown in real-world conditions at the Grant County International Airport (KMWH). The IM prototype flown in the flight test used data from the Ownship and the assigned lead, or Target, aircraft to calculate the airspeed necessary for the Ownship to achieve the desired spacing. The flight test demonstrated that the IM avionics prototype generally met the IM requirement for spacing accuracy. However, the control laws implemented require further development to reduce the high IM speed command rate and the number of speed reversals observed during the test. Pilots assessed the IM procedure as acceptable, and issues requiring further attention were identified. In summary, the IM avionics prototype showed significant promise in contributing to the goals of improving aircraft efficiency and airport throughput. The flight test results also provided important data to the FAA and the working group developing the follow-on version of the international IM standards.

Baxley, Brian T.↗

NASA NTRS2017

Flight Crew Survey Responses from the Interval Management (IM) Avionics Phase 2 Flight Test

The Interval Management (IM) Avionics Phase 2 flight test used three aircraft over a nineteen day period to operationally evaluate a prototype IM avionics. Quantitative data were collected on aircraft state data and IM spacing algorithm performance, and qualitative data were collected through end-of-scenario and end-of-day flight crew surveys. The majority of the IM operations met the performance goals established for spacing accuracy at the Achieve-by Point and the Planned Termination Point, however there were operations that did not meet goals for a variety of reasons. While the positive spacing accuracy results demonstrate the prototype IM avionics can contribute to the overall air traffic goal, critical issues were also identified that need to be addressed to enhance IM performance. The first category was those issues that impacted the conduct and results of the flight test, but are not part of the IM concept or procedures. These included the design of arrival and approach procedures was not ideal to support speed as the primary control mechanism, the ground-side of the Air Traffic Management Technology Demonstration (ATD-1) integrated concept of operations was not part of the flight test, and the high workload to manually enter the information required to conduct an IM operation. The second category was issues associated with the IM spacing algorithm or flight crew procedures. These issues include the high frequency of IM speed changes and reversals (accelerations), a mismatch between the deceleration rate used by the spacing algorithm and the actual aircraft performance, and some spacing error calculations were sensitive to normal operational variations in aircraft airspeed or altitude which triggered additional IM speed changes. Once the issues in these two categories are addressed, the future IM avionics should have considerable promise supporting the goals of improving system throughput and aircraft efficiency.

Baxley, Brian T.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Human-in-the-Loop Assessment of Alternative Clearances in Interval Management Arrival Operations

Interval Management Alternative Clearances (IMAC) was a human-in-the-loop simulation experiment conducted to explore the Air Traffic Management (ATM) Technology Demonstration (ATD-1) Concept of Operations (ConOps), which combines advanced arrival scheduling, controller decision support tools, and aircraft avionics to enable multiple time deconflicted, efficient arrival streams into a high-density terminal airspace. Interval Management (IM) is designed to support the ATD-1 concept by having an "Ownship" (IM-capable) aircraft achieve or maintain a specific time or distance behind a "Target" (preceding) aircraft. The IM software uses IM clearance information and the Ownship data (route of flight, current location, and wind) entered by the flight crew, and the Target aircraft's Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast state data, to calculate the airspeed necessary for the IM-equipped aircraft to achieve or maintain the assigned spacing goal.

Baxley, Brian T.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Air Traffic Management Technology Demostration: 1 Research and Procedural Testing of Routes

NASA's Air Traffic Management Technology Demonstration-1 (ATD-1) will operationally demonstrate the feasibility of efficient arrival operations combining ground-based and airborne NASA technologies. The ATD-1 integrated system consists of the Traffic Management Advisor with Terminal Metering which generates precise time-based schedules to the runway and merge points; Controller Managed Spacing decision support tools which provide controllers with speed advisories and other information needed to meet the schedule; and Flight deck-based Interval Management avionics and procedures which allow flight crews to adjust their speed to achieve precise relative spacing. Initial studies identified air-ground challenges related to the integration of these three scheduling and spacing technologies, and NASA's airborne spacing algorithm was modified to address some of these challenges. The Research and Procedural Testing of Routes human-in-the-loop experiment was then conducted to assess the performance of the new spacing algorithm. The results of this experiment indicate that the algorithm performed as designed, and the pilot participants found the airborne spacing concept, air-ground procedures, and crew interface to be acceptable. However, the researchers concluded that the data revealed issues with the frequency of speed changes and speed reversals.

Wilson, Sara R.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Air Traffic Management Technology Demostration Phase 1 (ATD) Interval Management for Near-Term Operations Validation of Acceptability (IM-NOVA) Experiment

The Interval Management for Near-term Operations Validation of Acceptability (IM-NOVA) experiment was conducted at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Langley Research Center (LaRC) in support of the NASA Airspace Systems Program's Air Traffic Management Technology Demonstration-1 (ATD-1). ATD-1 is intended to showcase an integrated set of technologies that provide an efficient arrival solution for managing aircraft using Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) surveillance, navigation, procedures, and automation for both airborne and ground-based systems. The goal of the IMNOVA experiment was to assess if procedures outlined by the ATD-1 Concept of Operations were acceptable to and feasible for use by flight crews in a voice communications environment when used with a minimum set of Flight Deck-based Interval Management (FIM) equipment and a prototype crew interface. To investigate an integrated arrival solution using ground-based air traffic control tools and aircraft Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) tools, the LaRC FIM system and the Traffic Management Advisor with Terminal Metering and Controller Managed Spacing tools developed at the NASA Ames Research Center (ARC) were integrated into LaRC's Air Traffic Operations Laboratory (ATOL). Data were collected from 10 crews of current 757/767 pilots asked to fly a high-fidelity, fixed-based simulator during scenarios conducted within an airspace environment modeled on the Dallas-Fort Worth (DFW) Terminal Radar Approach Control area. The aircraft simulator was equipped with the Airborne Spacing for Terminal Area Routes (ASTAR) algorithm and a FIM crew interface consisting of electronic flight bags and ADS-B guidance displays. Researchers used "pseudo-pilot" stations to control 24 simulated aircraft that provided multiple air traffic flows into the DFW International Airport, and recently retired DFW air traffic controllers served as confederate Center, Feeder, Final, and Tower controllers. Analyses of qualitative data revealed that the procedures used by flight crews to receive and execute interval management (IM) clearances in a voice communications environment were logical, easy to follow, did not contain any missing or extraneous steps, and required the use of an acceptable workload level. The majority of the pilot participants found the IM concept, in addition to the proposed FIM crew procedures, to be acceptable and indicated that the ATD-1 procedures could be successfully executed in a nearterm NextGen environment. Analyses of quantitative data revealed that the proposed procedures were feasible for use by flight crews in a voice communications environment. The delivery accuracy at the achieve-by point was within +/-5 sec, and the delivery precision was less than 5 sec. Furthermore, FIM speed commands occurred at a rate of less than one per minute, and pilots found the frequency of the speed commands to be acceptable at all times throughout the experiment scenarios.

Kibler, Jennifer L.↗

NASA NTRS2013

Acceptability of Flight Deck-Based Interval Management Crew Procedures

The Interval Management for Near-term Operations Validation of Acceptability (IM-NOVA) experiment was conducted at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Langley Research Center (LaRC) in support of the NASA Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) Airspace Systems Program's Air Traffic Management Technology Demonstration - 1 (ATD-1). ATD-1 is intended to showcase an integrated set of technologies that provide an efficient arrival solution for managing aircraft using NextGen surveillance, navigation, procedures, and automation for both airborne and ground-based systems. The goal of the IM-NOVA experiment was to assess if procedures outlined by the ATD-1 Concept of Operations, when used with a minimum set of Flight deck-based Interval Management (FIM) equipment and a prototype crew interface, were acceptable to and feasible for use by flight crews in a voice communications environment. To investigate an integrated arrival solution using ground-based air traffic control tools and aircraft automatic dependent surveillance broadcast (ADS-B) tools, the LaRC FIM system and the Traffic Management Advisor with Terminal Metering and Controller Managed Spacing tools developed at the NASA Ames Research Center (ARC) were integrated in LaRC's Air Traffic Operations Laboratory. Data were collected from 10 crews of current, qualified 757/767 pilots asked to fly a high-fidelity, fixed based simulator during scenarios conducted within an airspace environment modeled on the Dallas-Fort Worth (DFW) Terminal Radar Approach Control area. The aircraft simulator was equipped with the Airborne Spacing for Terminal Area Routes algorithm and a FIM crew interface consisting of electronic flight bags and ADS-B guidance displays. Researchers used "pseudo-pilot" stations to control 24 simulated aircraft that provided multiple air traffic flows into DFW, and recently retired DFW air traffic controllers served as confederate Center, Feeder, Final, and Tower controllers. Pilot participant feedback indicated that the procedures used by flight crews to receive and execute interval management (IM) clearances in a voice communications environment were logical, easy to follow, did not contain any missing or extraneous steps, and required the use of an acceptable level of workload. The majority of the pilot participants found the IM concept, in addition to the proposed FIM crew procedures, to be acceptable and indicated that the ATD-1 procedures can be successfully executed in a near-term NextGen environment.

Murdock, Jennifer L.↗

NASA NTRS2013

Evaluation of Flight Deck-Based Interval Management Crew Procedure Feasibility

Air traffic demand is predicted to increase over the next 20 years, creating a need for new technologies and procedures to support this growth in a safe and efficient manner. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Air Traffic Management Technology Demonstration - 1 (ATD-1) will operationally demonstrate the feasibility of efficient arrival operations combining ground-based and airborne NASA technologies. The integration of these technologies will increase throughput, reduce delay, conserve fuel, and minimize environmental impacts. The ground-based tools include Traffic Management Advisor with Terminal Metering for precise time-based scheduling and Controller Managed Spacing decision support tools for better managing aircraft delay with speed control. The core airborne technology in ATD-1 is Flight deck-based Interval Management (FIM). FIM tools provide pilots with speed commands calculated using information from Automatic Dependent Surveillance - Broadcast. The precise merging and spacing enabled by FIM avionics and flight crew procedures will reduce excess spacing buffers and result in higher terminal throughput. This paper describes a human-in-the-loop experiment designed to assess the acceptability and feasibility of the ATD-1 procedures used in a voice communications environment. This experiment utilized the ATD-1 integrated system of ground-based and airborne technologies. Pilot participants flew a high-fidelity fixed base simulator equipped with an airborne spacing algorithm and a FIM crew interface. Experiment scenarios involved multiple air traffic flows into the Dallas-Fort Worth Terminal Radar Control airspace. Results indicate that the proposed procedures were feasible for use by flight crews in a voice communications environment. The delivery accuracy at the achieve-by point was within +/- five seconds and the delivery precision was less than five seconds. Furthermore, FIM speed commands occurred at a rate of less than one per minute, and pilots found the frequency of the speed commands to be acceptable at all times throughout the experiment scenarios.

Wilson, Sara R.↗

NASA NTRS2013

Experiment Description and Results for Arrival Operations Using Interval Management with Spacing to Parallel Dependent Runways (IMSPiDR)

The predicted increase in the number of commercial aircraft operations creates a need for improved operational efficiency. Two areas believed to offer increases in aircraft efficiency are optimized profile descents and dependent parallel runway operations. Using Flight deck Interval Management (FIM) software and procedures during these operations, flight crews can achieve by the runway threshold an interval assigned by air traffic control (ATC) behind the preceding aircraft that maximizes runway throughput while minimizing additional fuel consumption and pilot workload. This document describes an experiment where 24 pilots flew arrivals into the Dallas Fort-Worth terminal environment using one of three simulators at NASA?s Langley Research Center. Results indicate that pilots delivered their aircraft to the runway threshold within +/- 3.5 seconds of their assigned time interval, and reported low workload levels. In general, pilots found the FIM concept, procedures, speeds, and interface acceptable. Analysis of the time error and FIM speed changes as a function of arrival stream position suggest the spacing algorithm generates stable behavior while in the presence of continuous (wind) or impulse (offset) error. Concerns reported included multiple speed changes within a short time period, and an airspeed increase followed shortly by an airspeed decrease.

Baxley, Brian T.↗

NASA NTRS2010

Functional Allocation with Airborne Self-Separation Evaluated in a Piloted Simulation

A human-in-the-loop simulation experiment was designed and conducted to evaluate an airborne self-separation concept. The activity supports the National Aeronautics and Space Administration s (NASA) research focus on function allocation for separation assurance. The objectives of the experiment were twofold: (1) use experiment design features in common with a companion study of ground-based automated separation assurance to promote comparability, and (2) assess agility of self-separation operations in managing trajectory-changing events in high traffic density, en-route operations with arrival time constraints. This paper describes the experiment and presents initial results associated with subjective workload ratings and group discussion feedback obtained from the experiment s commercial transport pilot participants.

Wing, David J.↗

NASA NTRS2010

Comparison of Ground-Based and Airborne Function Allocation Concepts for NextGen Using Human-In-The-Loop Simulations

Investigation of function allocation for the Next Generation Air Transportation System is being conducted by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). To provide insight on comparability of different function allocations for separation assurance, two human-in-the-loop simulation experiments were conducted on homogeneous airborne and ground-based approaches to four-dimensional trajectory-based operations, one referred to as ground-based automated separation assurance (groundbased) and the other as airborne trajectory management with self-separation (airborne). In the coordinated simulations at NASA s Ames and Langley Research Centers, controllers for the ground-based concept at Ames and pilots for the airborne concept at Langley managed the same traffic scenarios using the two different concepts. The common scenarios represented a significant increase in airspace demand over current operations. Using common independent variables, the simulations varied traffic density, scheduling constraints, and the timing of trajectory change events. Common metrics were collected to enable a comparison of relevant results. Where comparisons were possible, no substantial differences in performance or operator acceptability were observed. Mean schedule conformance and flight path deviation were considered adequate for both approaches. Conflict detection warning times and resolution times were mostly adequate, but certain conflict situations were detected too late to be resolved in a timely manner. This led to some situations in which safety was compromised and/or workload was rated as being unacceptable in both experiments. Operators acknowledged these issues in their responses and ratings but gave generally positive assessments of the respective concept and operations they experienced. Future studies will evaluate technical improvements and procedural enhancements to achieve the required level of safety and acceptability and will investigate the integration of airborne and ground-based capabilities within the same airspace to leverage the benefits of each concept.

Wing, David J.↗

NASA NTRS2010

Comparison of Airborne and Ground-Based Function Allocation Concepts for NextGen Using Human-In-The-Loop Simulations

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.

Wing, David J.↗