Results for “Pilots” — Page 17

NASA NTRS2014

Adaptive Controller Effects on Pilot Behavior

Adaptive control provides robustness and resilience for highly uncertain, and potentially unpredictable, flight dynamics characteristic. Some of the recent flight experiences of pilot-in-the-loop with an adaptive controller have exhibited unpredicted interactions. In retrospect, this is not surprising once it is realized that there are now two adaptive controllers interacting, the software adaptive control system and the pilot. An experiment was conducted to categorize these interactions on the pilot with an adaptive controller during control surface failures. One of the objectives of this experiment was to determine how the adaptation time of the controller affects pilots. The pitch and roll errors, and stick input increased for increasing adaptation time and during the segment when the adaptive controller was adapting. Not surprisingly, altitude, cross track and angle deviations, and vertical velocity also increase during the failure and then slowly return to pre-failure levels. Subjects may change their behavior even as an adaptive controller is adapting with additional stick inputs. Therefore, the adaptive controller should adapt as fast as possible to minimize flight track errors. This will minimize undesirable interactions between the pilot and the adaptive controller and maintain maneuvering precision.

Trujillo, Anna C.↗

NASA NTRS2016

The Impact of Suggestive Maneuver Guidance on UAS Pilots Performing the Detect and Avoid Function

This presentation discusses the results of a recent UAS Integration into the NAS human-in-the-loop simulation. In the study, 16 active UAS pilots flew a UAS through civil airspace and were tasked with maintaining well clear from other aircraft in the area. Pilots performed the task with four different detect and avoid (DAA) traffic displays, each of which varied in the form of guidance it provided to pilots The present findings focus on how the different displays impacted pilots' measured response to scripted conflicts with their aircraft. Measured response is made up of several components, each of which help inform our understanding of the pilots' role in the overall detect and avoid task.

detect and avoid↗

NASA NTRS2015

An Evaluation of Detect and Avoid Displays for UAS: The Effect of Information Level and Display Location on Pilot Performance

The pilot-in-the-loop Detect-and-Avoid (DAA) task requires the pilot to carry out three major functions: 1) detect a potential threat, 2) determine an appropriate resolution maneuver, and 3) execute that resolution maneuver via the GCS control and navigation interface(s). The purpose of the present study was to examine two main questions with respect to DAA display considerations that could impact pilots ability to maintain well clear from other aircraft. First, what is the effect of a minimum (or basic) information display compared to an advanced information display on pilot performance? Second, what is the effect of display location on UAS pilot performance? Two levels of information level (basic, advanced) were compared across two levels of display location (standalone, integrated), for a total of four displays. The results indicate that the advanced displays had faster overall response times compared to the basic displays, however, there were no significant differences between the standalone and integrated displays.

detect and avoid↗

NASA NTRS2017

Quantifying Pilot Contribution to Flight Safety during Drive Shaft Failure

Accident statistics cite the flight crew as a causal factor in over 60% of large transport aircraft fatal accidents. Yet, a well-trained and well-qualified pilot is acknowledged as the critical center point of aircraft systems safety and an integral safety component of the entire commercial aviation system. The latter statement, while generally accepted, cannot be verified because little or no quantitative data exists on how and how many accidents/incidents are averted by crew actions. A joint NASA/FAA high-fidelity motion-base simulation experiment specifically addressed this void by collecting data to quantify the human (pilot) contribution to safety-of-flight and the methods they use in today's National Airspace System. A human-in-the-loop test was conducted using the FAA's Oklahoma City Flight Simulation Branch Level D-certified B-737-800 simulator to evaluate the pilot's contribution to safety-of-flight during routine air carrier flight operations and in response to aircraft system failures. These data are fundamental to and critical for the design and development of future increasingly autonomous systems that can better support the human in the cockpit. Eighteen U.S. airline crews flew various normal and non-normal procedures over a two-day period and their actions were recorded in response to failures. To quantify the human's contribution to safety of flight, crew complement was used as the experiment independent variable in a between-subjects design. Pilot actions and performance during single pilot and reduced crew operations were measured for comparison against the normal two-crew complement during normal and non-normal situations. This paper details the crew's actions, including decision-making, and responses while dealing with a drive shaft failure - one of 6 non-normal events that were simulated in this experiment.

Kramer, Lynda J.↗

NASA NTRS2017

Quantifying Pilot Contribution to Flight Safety During Dual Generator Failure

Accident statistics cite flight crew error in over 60% of accidents involving transport category aircraft. Yet, a well-trained and well-qualified pilot is acknowledged as the critical center point of aircraft systems safety and an integral safety component of the entire commercial aviation system. No data currently exists that quantifies the contribution of the flight crew in this role. Neither does data exist for how often the flight crew handles non-normal procedures or system failures on a daily basis in the National Airspace System. A pilot-in-the-loop high fidelity motion simulation study was conducted by the NASA Langley Research Center in partnership with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to evaluate the pilot's contribution to flight safety during normal flight and in response to aircraft system failures. Eighteen crews flew various normal and non-normal procedures over a two-day period and their actions were recorded in response to failures. To quantify the human's contribution, crew complement was used as the experiment independent variable in a between-subjects design. Pilot actions and performance when one of the flight crew was unavailable were also recorded for comparison against the nominal two-crew operations. This paper details diversion decisions, perceived safety of flight, workload, time to complete pertinent checklists, and approach and landing results while dealing with a complete loss of electrical generators. Loss of electrical power requires pilots to complete the flight without automation support of autopilots, flight directors, or auto throttles. For reduced crew complements, the additional workload and perceived safety of flight was considered unacceptable.

Etherington, Timothy J.↗

NASA NTRS2018

Design, Development, and Flight Evaluation of Pilot Displays and Long-Track Control for Wake Surfing Applications

From April to May 2017, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Armstrong Flight Research Center completed a series of flights with a trail C-20A airplane surfing in the wake of a Gulfstream III airplane using a commercially available datalink as the primary communication between the two aircraft. The purpose of this test was to characterize the aerodynamic benefits received by the trail airplane flying in the upwash portion of the wake generated from the lead airplane. Lateral and vertical relative position to the wake were automatically controlled through an experimental programmable autopilot on the C-20A airplane. Long-track, the separation distance between the two aircraft, was maintained by test pilots managing throttle position using customized cockpit displays. These displays provided the pilots with throttle cues for maintaining long-track position and situational awareness of the wake vortex relative to the position of the trail airplane. Flight testing demonstrated the ability of the pilots to use these displays to maintain a safe long-track distance, but found there to be trades between tracking performance and the frequency of throttle motion. The wake awareness display provided the pilots with adequate situational awareness of the wake vortex during the flight experiment. This paper presents a summary of the design, development, and flight evaluation of the pilot displays and long-track control.

aircraft↗

NASA NTRS2014

UAS Measured Response: The Effect of GCS Control Mode Interfaces on Pilot Ability to Comply with ATC Clearances

The present study examines the effects of three different control mode interfaces on unmanned aerial system (UAS) pilots ability to comply with air traffic controller traffic clearances. Pilots controlled a simulated UAS with a waypoint-only interface, an auto-pilot interface and a manual, stick and throttle interface. Results indicate that pilots are best able to get in-the-loop when provided with auto-pilot and manual control inputs. Limitations to the present study and future analyses are discussed.

Measured Response↗

NASA NTRS2014

UAS Measured Response: The Effect of GCS Control Mode Interfaces on Pilot Ability to Comply with ATC Clearances

This presentation summarizes the background and primary findings from a study on UAS (Unmanned Aerial Systems) pilots' ability to get 'in-the-loop' when responding to air traffic controller clearances around traffic and weather. Pilots controlled a simulated UAS using three different control mode interfaces: a waypoint-to-waypoint interface, an auto-pilot interface (which allowed heading and altitude holds), and a manual stick-and-throttle interface. Pilots' response times were compared across the three conditions, with the waypoint-to-waypoint interface resulting in the slowest pilot performance in several of the metrics. Conclusions from these findings and limitations of the study are discussed.

Measured Response↗

NASA NTRS2019

Measuring Pilot Eye Fixations: What Have We Learned About Monitoring?

There is a substantial literature on eye-tracking measurement for pilots. These measures offer one method for studying pilot visual attention. This presentation reviews this literature to identify the range of eye-tracking measures used; the primary findings from eye tracking as it relates to commercial transport pilots; and whether we can learn anything from these studies about pilot monitoring. We identify gaps between the process of pilot monitoring and what we can know from studying eye tracking. This is a brief presentation.

Commercial Aviation↗

NASA NTRS2020

UAS Pilot Assessments of Display and Alerting for the Airborne Collision Avoidance System XU

Unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) must comply with specific standards to operate in the National Airspace System (NAS). Among the requirements are the detect and avoid (DAA) capabilities, which include display, alerting, and guidance specifications. Previous studies have queried pilots for their subjective feedback on these display elements on earlier systems; the present study sought pilot evaluations with an initial iteration of the unmanned variant of a Next Generation Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS XU). Sixteen participants piloted simulated aircraft with both standalone and integrated DAA displays. Their opinions were gathered using post-block and post-simulation questionnaires as well as guided debriefs. The data showed pilots had better understanding and comfort with the system when using an integrated display. Pilots also rated ACAS Xu alerting and guidance as generally acceptable and effective. Implications for further development of ACAS XU and DAA displays are discussed.

UAS↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

UAS Pilot Assessments of Display and Alerting for the Airborne Collision Avoidance System XU

Unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) must comply with specific standards to operate in the National Airspace System (NAS). Among the requirements are the detect and avoid (DAA) capabilities, which include display, alerting, and guidance specifications. Previous studies have queried pilots for their subjective feedback on these display elements on earlier systems; the present study sought pilot evaluations with an initial iteration of the unmanned variant of a Next Generation Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS XU). Sixteen participants piloted simulated aircraft with both standalone and integrated DAA displays. Their opinions were gathered using post-block and post-simulation questionnaires as well as guided debriefs. The data showed pilots had better understanding and comfort with the system when using an integrated display. Pilots also rated ACAS Xu alerting and guidance as generally acceptable and effective. Implications for further development of ACAS XU and DAA displays are discussed.

unmanned aircraft systems↗

NASA NTRS2020

UAS Pilot Assessments of Display and Alerting for the Next Generation Airborne Avoidance System

Unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) must comply with specific standards to operate in the National Airspace System (NAS). Among the requirements are the detect and avoid (DAA) capabilities, which include display, alerting, and guidance specifications. Previous studies have queried pilots for their subjective feedback on these display elements on earlier systems; the present study sought pilot evaluations with an initial iteration of the unmanned variant of a Next Generation Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS XU). Sixteen participants piloted simulated aircraft with both standalone and integrated DAA displays. Their opinions were gathered using post-block and post-simulation questionnaires as well as guided debriefs. The data showed pilots had better understanding and comfort with the system when using an integrated display. Pilots also rated ACAS Xu alerting and guidance as generally acceptable and effective. Implications for further development of ACAS XU and DAA displays are discussed.

unmanned aircraft systems↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

UAS Pilot Assessments of Display and Alerting for the Next Generation Airborne Collision Avoidance System Xu

Unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) must comply with specific standards to operate in the National Airspace System (NAS). Among the requirements are the detect and avoid (DAA) capabilities, which include display, alerting, and guidance specifications. Previous studies have queried pilots for their subjective feedback on these display elements on earlier systems; the present study sought pilot evaluations with an initial iteration of the unmanned variant of a Next Generation Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS XU). Sixteen participants piloted simulated aircraft with both standalone and integrated DAA displays. Their opinions were gathered using post-block and post-simulation questionnaires as well as guided debriefs. The data showed pilots had better understanding and comfort with the system when using an integrated display. Pilots also rated ACAS Xu alerting and guidance as generally acceptable and effective. Implications for further development of ACAS XU and DAA displays are discussed.

unmanned aircraft systems↗

NASA NTRS2022

Fatigue, Schedules, Sleep, and Sleepiness in U.S. Commercial Pilots During COVID-19

Introduction: COVID-19 has had a significant impact on the aviation industry. While reduced flying capacity may intuitively translate to reduced fatigue risk by way of fewer flights and duty hours, the actual impact of the pandemic on pilot fatigue is unknown. Methods: We surveyed US commercial airline pilots in late 2020 (n = 669) and early 2021 (n = 156) to assess the impact of COVID-19 on schedules and fatigue during the pandemic. Results: Overall, pilots reported reduced flight and duty hours compared to pre-pandemic. Average sleep on workdays was slightly shorter in late 2020 (6.88 h) and recovered to pre-pandemic levels in early 2021 (6.95 h). Similarly, the frequency of sleepiness on days off and in-flight increased in late 2020, with 54% of pilots reporting an increase in in-flight sleepiness, then returned to pre-pandemic levels in early 2021. The use of in-flight sleepiness countermeasures remained the same across assessed time points. Pilots highlighted several factors which impacted their sleep and job performance, including limited access to nutritional food during duty days and layovers, reduced access to exercise facilities during layovers, increased stress due to job insecurity and health concerns, increased distractions and workload, and changes to scheduling. Discussion: Despite a reduction in flights and duty days, COVID-19 led to increased sleepiness on days off and in-flight, potentially due to the negative impact of lack of access to essential needs and heightened stress on sleep. Operators need to monitor the change in these COVID-19 related risks as the industry returns to full service.

sleep↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Assessing Helicopter Pilots’ Detect and Avoid and Collision Avoidance Performance With ACAS Xr

The latest variant of the Federal Aviation Administration’s Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS X) is being designed for both crewed and uncrewed rotorcraft. Referred to as ACAS Xr, the system joins a suite of other ACAS X variants poised to replace the Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS II). ACAS Xr is tuned to support current-day helicopter platforms as well as electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing (eVTOL) vehicles that are still under development. Given this flexibility, ACAS Xr may be used by helicopter crews currently in operation or by remotely-operated eVTOL aircraft in the emerging Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) market. To cover the range of potential uses, two distinct configurations are being proposed for ACAS Xr: Collision Avoidance System (CAS) and Detect and Avoid (DAA). Under the CAS configuration, ACAS Xr provides minimal caution-level alerting but issues directive warning-level alerting and guidance. The DAA configuration, by contrast, provides caution-level alerting and guidance, in addition to the warning-level alerting and guidance. The current study was performed as part of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s AAM project. Six helicopter pilots were recruited to fly a variety of scripted traffic scenarios in a full-motion, crewed eVTOL simulator. Participants flew 60 encounters over two days, reacting to pre-recorded intruder aircraft that were scripted to fly into the participant’s aircraft from different approach angles, relative altitudes, and during different phases of flight. The pilots flew half of the encounters with the CAS configuration and half with the DAA configuration. Within each block of 30 encounters, pilots experienced 10 conflicts while in cruise, 10 in hover, and 10 while on approach to a heliport. Results showed that pilot response times were consistently under 5 seconds for RAs and under 10 seconds for DAA alerts, when present, during all three phases of flight. Unsurprisingly, the DAA configuration was associated with lower rates of en-route and high-severity losses of DAA well clear compared to the CAS configuration in all phases of flight except for the terminal area. Rates of losses of DAA well clear were found to be substantially higher in the Hover scenario, compared to Cruise. Pilots failed to fully comply with RAs at a rate of 0.10-0.18 in all conditions except for the DAA configuration in the Hover scenario, which was associated with a higher non-compliance rate of 0.4 due to Descend RAs issued at low altitudes. The implications of these results with regards to the ongoing development of ACAS Xr is discussed.

air taxis↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Assessing Helicopter Pilots’ Detect and Avoid and Collision Avoidance Performance with ACAS Xr

The latest variant of the Federal Aviation Administration’s Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS X) is being designed for both crewed and uncrewed rotorcraft. Referred to as ACAS Xr, the system joins a suite of other ACAS X variants poised to replace the Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS II). ACAS Xr is tuned to support current-day helicopter platforms as well as electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing (eVTOL) vehicles that are still under development. Given this flexibility, ACAS Xr may be used by helicopter crews currently in operation or by remotely-operated eVTOL aircraft in the emerging Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) market. To cover the range of potential uses, two distinct configurations are being proposed for ACAS Xr: Collision Avoidance System (CAS) and Detect and Avoid (DAA). Under the CAS configuration, ACAS Xr provides minimal caution-level alerting but issues directive warning-level alerting and guidance. The DAA configuration, by contrast, provides caution-level alerting and guidance, in addition to the warning-level alerting and guidance. The current study was performed as part of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s AAM project. Six helicopter pilots were recruited to fly a variety of scripted traffic scenarios in a full-motion, crewed eVTOL simulator. Participants flew 60 encounters over two days, reacting to pre-recorded intruder aircraft that were scripted to fly into the participant’s aircraft from different approach angles, relative altitudes, and during different phases of flight. The pilots flew half of the encounters with the CAS configuration and half with the DAA configuration. Within each block of 30 encounters, pilots experienced 10 conflicts while in cruise, 10 in hover, and 10 while on approach to a heliport. Results showed that pilot response times were consistently under 5 seconds for RAs and under 10 seconds for DAA alerts, when present, during all three phases of flight. Unsurprisingly, the DAA configuration was associated with lower rates of en-route and high-severity losses of DAA well clear compared to the CAS configuration in all phases of flight except for the terminal area. Rates of losses of DAA well clear were found to be substantially higher in the Hover scenario, compared to Cruise. Pilots failed to fully comply with RAs at a rate of 0.10-0.18 in all conditions except for the DAA configuration in the Hover scenario, which was associated with a higher non-compliance rate of 0.4 due to Descend RAs issued at low altitudes. The implications of these results with regards to the ongoing development of ACAS Xr is discussed.

air taxis↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Overview of an Exploratory, Real-Time, Multi-Pilot Simulation Study of Early eVTOL Operations at Non-Towered Vertiports

This paper provides a report out on an exploratory, multi-aircraft/multi-pilot, real-time simulation study conducted by NASA of early commercial powered-lift, Urban Air Mobility (UAM) operations at a non-towered vertiport. As used in this paper, vertiport refers to the primary ground and airspace elements facilitating the takeoff and landing of electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft with central emphasis on a vertipad, i.e. the physical touch-down and lift-off area and surrounding approach , departure, local pattern procedures. The study, known as the Piloted UML-2 ConOps Study (PUCS), had two high-level goals. The first goal was providing preliminary insights and observations relevant to the piloting and flight operations of early, commercial UAM operations aligned with the initial stage of the FAA’s Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) Implementation Plan and the second level NASA’s UAM Maturity Level (UML) scale. The second goal was evaluating a novel, medium-fidelity, extensible, many-pilot, real-time simulation capability known as the UAM Flyers developed by NASA. The Flyers are intended to allow rapid development, screening, evaluation, and demonstrations of potential Concepts of Operation (ConOps) for UAM flight operations and airspace management in a modular and low-cost, real-time, human-in-the-loop rapid simulation prototyping environment. For this study, ten Flyer cockpits were configured to evaluate flight operations through a non-towered vertiport with pilot interfaces and displays (external and in-cockpit) appropriate for operations under visual flight rules (VFR) and employing flight and communication procedures representative of current operations at non-towered airports. The presented results include an achieved operational tempo; durations of individual flight tasks for approaches and departures; off-nominal events and triggers; and pilot comments regarding potential procedural and technology improvements.

Urban Air Mobility↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Overview of an Exploratory, Multi-Pilot Simulation Study of Early eVTOL Operations at Non-Towered Vertiports

This paper provides a report out on an exploratory, multi-aircraft/multi-pilot, real-time simulation study conducted by NASA of early commercial powered-lift, Urban Air Mobility (UAM) operations at a non-towered vertiport. As used in this paper, vertiport refers to the primary ground and airspace elements facilitating the takeoff and landing of electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft with central emphasis on a vertipad, i.e. the physical touch-down and lift-off area and surrounding approach , departure, local pattern procedures. The study, known as the Piloted UML-2 ConOps Study (PUCS), had two high-level goals. The first goal was providing preliminary insights and observations relevant to the piloting and flight operations of early, commercial UAM operations aligned with the initial stage of the FAA’s Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) Implementation Plan and the second level NASA’s UAM Maturity Level (UML) scale. The second goal was evaluating a novel, medium-fidelity, extensible, many-pilot, real-time simulation capability known as the UAM Flyers developed by NASA. The Flyers are intended to allow rapid development, screening, evaluation, and demonstrations of potential Concepts of Operation (ConOps) for UAM flight operations and airspace management in a modular and low-cost, real-time, human-in-the-loop rapid simulation prototyping environment. For this study, ten Flyer cockpits were configured to evaluate flight operations through a non-towered vertiport with pilot interfaces and displays (external and in-cockpit) appropriate for operations under visual flight rules (VFR) and employing flight and communication procedures representative of current operations at non-towered airports. The presented results include an achieved operational tempo; durations of individual flight tasks for approaches and departures; off-nominal events and triggers; and pilot comments regarding potential procedural and technology improvements.

Urban Air Mobility↗