Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “MANNED AIRCRAFT”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 91 records · Page 5
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2014

Simulation Technology at NASA

NASA Ames Research Center is home to several high-fidelity research flight and air-traffic control simulation facilities which, together with an experienced workforce, produce high-quality research data and findings that have proven to be applicable in the real world. These assets include the Vertical Motion Simulator (VMS), Crew Vehicle Systems Research Facility (CVSRF), Future Flight Central (FFC) air traffic control tower simulator, and several air-traffic control (ATC) simulators. The VMS combines a high-fidelity simulation capability with an adaptable simulation environment, enabling customization for numerous human-in-the-loop research applications. The distinctive feature of the VMS is its unparalleled large amplitude, high-fidelity motion capability. In over 30 years of continuous operation, the VMS has contributed significantly to the body of knowledge in a range of disciplines directly benefiting several aerospace programs and flight safety, including the design and development of flight control systems for the Joint Strike Fighter, Space Shuttle Orbiter, and rotorcraft. It continues to be used for researching new vehicle configurations, vehicle control and safety, transfer-of-training, etc., by NASA, other government agencies, and Industry.The CVSRF includes two motion-based flight simulators: a Boeing 747-400 full flight simulator and the reconfigurable Advanced Concepts Flight Simulator (ACFS). These simulators are primarily used to research air-traffic management concepts and procedures, advanced navigation and avionics concepts, and cockpit human factors. FFC is a full-sized control tower simulator with a 360-degree external field-of-view display system and reconfigurable system architecture. FFC and the ATC simulators are used for testing air-traffic management automation and decision support tools and demonstrate their feasibility in a realistic environment prior to technology transfer for implementation in the National Airspace System (NAS).To support integrated simulations and flight-tests for NASA's Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) in the National Airspace System (NAS) Project, NASA developed a distributed test environment incorporating Live, Virtual, Constructive, (LVC) concepts. Development of the software enabling the LVC is conducted primarily at the Distributed Simulation Research Lab (DSRL) at NASA Ames. The LVC components provide the core infrastructure supporting simulation of UAS operations by integrating live and virtual aircraft in a realistic air traffic environment. This provides the ability to conduct tests more efficiently by promoting the use of existing distributed assets. The LVC infrastructure was used in several human-in-the-loop simulations to evaluate acceptance of Detect and Avoid (DAA) advisories used by UAS pilots to maintain well clear of other virtual traffic and to negotiate maneuvers with air traffic control. It is currently being used to support testing of self-separation algorithms between unmanned and manned aircraft in live flight. Further simulations with more comprehensive air traffic scenarios mixing live and virtual aircraft is planned.In the current fiscal environment, maintaining and upgrading these high-fidelity simulation assets and retaining the skilled workforce necessary to meet future research needs is the primary non-technical challenge.

CVSRF↗
NASA NTRS2018

Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) Integration into the National Airspace System (NAS)

NASA's Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) integration into the National Air Space (NAS) project has been working closely with the FAA and RTCA Special Committee 228 to identify and break down barriers to UAS integration. A focus of this work is on detect and avoid (DAA) technologies. A pilot has responsibility to see and avoid other aircraft and to remain "well clear," using their best judgment (Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Sec. 91.113). For UAS to perform this function, the see function is replaced by sensors to detect the other aircraft. Secondly, the pilot judgment of well clear has to be replaced by a mathematical expression. For Phase 1 of this effort, a well clear violation was defined if all three of these conditions are true: a) the horizontal clearance is less than 4000 ft., and b) the vertical clearance is less than 450 ft., and c) the time to loss of well clear is less than 35 seconds. This definition was developed with a great deal of community input and testing to ensure interoperability with Air Traffic Control (ATC) and pilots of manned aircraft. Appropriate guidance, alerting and displays were developed to allow UAS, with the appropriate sensors, to effectively maintain well clear. This work contributed to FAA Technical Standard Orders: TSO-C211, Detect and Avoid and TSO-C212, ATAR for Traffic Surveillance. Phase 2 of this work extends the operational environment to include the terminal area and lesser capable aircraft that might not have the payload capability to carry the RADAR defined in Phase 1. This session reports on work from Phase 1 and initial work in Phase 2.

UAS↗
NASA NTRS2018

Detect and Avoid: Efforts from NASA's UAS Integration into the NAS Project

NASA's Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) integration into the National Air Space (NAS) project has been working closely with the FAA and RTCA Special Committee 228 to identify and break down barriers to UAS integration. A focus of this work is on detect and avoid (DAA) technologies. A pilot has responsibility to see and avoid other aircraft and to remain "well clear," using their best judgment (Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Sec. 91.113). For UAS to perform this function, the see function is replaced by sensors to detect the other aircraft. Secondly, the pilot judgment of well clear has to be replaced by a mathematical expression. For Phase 1 of this effort, a well clear violation was defined if all three of these conditions are true: a) the horizontal clearance is less than 4000 ft., and b) the vertical clearance is less than 450 ft., and c) the time to loss of well clear is less than 35 seconds. This definition was developed with a great deal of community input and testing to ensure interoperability with Air Traffic Control (ATC) and pilots of manned aircraft. Appropriate guidance, alerting and displays were developed to allow UAS, with the appropriate sensors, to effectively maintain well clear. This work contributed to FAA Technical Standard Orders: TSO-C211, Detect and Avoid and TSO-C212, ATAR for Traffic Surveillance. Phase 2 of this work extends the operational environment to include the terminal area and lesser capable aircraft that might not have the payload capability to carry the RADAR defined in Phase 1. This session reports on work from Phase 1 and initial work in Phase 2.

Detect and Avoid (DAA)↗
NASA NTRS2000

Flight Control System Development for the BURRO Autonomous UAV

Developing autonomous flying vehicles has been a growing field in aeronautical research within the last decade and will continue into the next century. With concerns about safety, size, and cost of manned aircraft, several autonomous vehicle projects are currently being developed; uninhabited rotorcraft offer solutions to requirements for hover, vertical take-off and landing, as well as slung load transportation capabilities. The newness of the technology requires flight control engineers to question what design approaches, control law architectures, and performance criteria apply to control law development and handling quality evaluation. To help answer these questions, this paper documents the control law design process for Kaman Aerospace BURRO project. This paper will describe the approach taken to design control laws and develop math models which will be used to convert the manned K-MAX into the BURRO autonomous rotorcraft. With the ability of the K-MAX to lift its own weight (6000 lb) the load significantly affects the dynamics of the system; the paper addresses the additional design requirements for slung load autonomous flight. The approach taken in this design was to: 1) generate accurate math models of the K-MAX helicopter with and without slung loads, 2) select design specifications that would deliver good performance as well as satisfy mission criteria, and 3) develop and tune the control system architecture to meet the design specs and mission criteria. An accurate math model was desired for control system development. The Comprehensive Identification from Frequency Responses (CIFER(R)) software package was used to identify a linear math model for unloaded and loaded flight at hover, 50 kts, and 100 kts. The results of an eight degree-of-freedom CIFER(R)-identified linear model for the unloaded hover flight condition are presented herein, and the identification of the two-body slung-load configuration is in progress.

Colbourne, Jason D.↗
NASA NTRS2013

NASA Activity Update for the 2013 Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (UVSI) Yearbook

This year s report offers a high level perspective on some of the UAS related activities in which NASA is involved, both internal and external to the agency. Internally, NASA issued UAS operational policy on certification of NASA UAS and aircrew. A team of NASA UAS experts and operators analyzed all current procedures and best practices to design the policy. An update to the agencies Aircraft Operations Management Manual incorporated a new chapter to address UAS planning, preflight operations, flight operations, flight crew requirements, airworthiness and flight safety reviews. NASA UAS are classified into three categories based on weight and airspeed. Aircrews, including observers, are classified by how they interface with the UAS, and the policy defines qualifications, training, and currency. The NASA flight readiness approval process identifies risks and mitigations in order to reduce the likelihood and/or consequence of the risk to an acceptable level. The UAS operations process incorporates all aspects of airworthiness, flight standards and range safety exactly the same processes used for NASA manned aircraft operations. NASA has two internal organizations that routinely operate UAS. The Science Mission Directorate utilizes UAS as part of its Airborne Science Program and is the most frequent operator of NASA UAS in both national and international airspace. The Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate conducts UAS flight operations in addition to conducting research important to the UAS community. This past year the Science Mission Directorate supported the Hurricane and Severe Storm Sentimental (HS3) Mission with two NASA Global Hawk platforms. HS3 is a five-year mission specifically targeted to investigate the processes that underlie hurricane formation. During the 2012 portion of this mission the Global Hawk overflew hurricanes Leslie and Nadine in the Atlantic Ocean completing 6 flights and accumulating more than 148 flight hours. Another multi-year mission was initiated last year when the Sensor Integrated Environmental Remote Research Aircraft (SIERRA) UAS began surveying faults in California s Surprise Valley. A team of scientists and engineers from the United States Geological Survey (USGS), NASA Ames Research Center, Central Washington University, and Carnegie Mellon University will measure magnetic fields using ground surveys and the SIERRA to map the geophysics below the surface of Surprise Valley. The data collected will be used to generate 3D maps of the geophysical data of the area. The Aeronautics Mission Directorate continues its collaboration with Boeing to conduct UAS flight operations of the X-48C, a modified version of the X-48B originally built by Cranfield Aerospace, United Kingdom. The Aeronautics Mission Directorate utilizes vehicles of this size for a wide variety of research studies. Most of these operations are conducted within restricted airspace. The Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate also sponsors the UAS in the National Airspace System (NAS) Project, which is working in close cooperation with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to address critical challenges associated with routine UAS operations in civil airspace. The project is focused on separation assurance and collision avoidance systems and algorithms, command and control for non-military operations including spectrum allocation requirements, human system interaction issues, and safety and certification topics.

Bauer, Jeffrey E.↗
NASA NTRS2010

NASA Dryden Flight Research Center: Unmanned Aircraft Operations

This slide presentation reviews several topics related to operating unmanned aircraft in particular sharing aspects of unmanned aircraft from the perspective of a pilot. There is a section on the Global Hawk project which contains information about the first Global Hawk science mission, (i.e., Global Hawk Pacific (GloPac). Included in this information is GloPac science highlights, a listing of the GloPac Instruments. The second Global Hawk science mission was Genesis and Rapid Intensification Process (GRIP), for the NASA Hurricane Science Research Team. Information includes the instrumentation and the flights that were undertaken during the program. A section on Ikhana is next. This section includes views of the Ground Control Station (GCS), and a discussion of how the piloting of UAS is different from piloting in a manned aircraft. There is also discussion about displays and controls of aircraft. There is also discussion about what makes a pilot. The last section relates the use of Ikhana in the western states fire mission.

Pestana, Mark↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Overview of Advanced Air Mobility Research at NASA

Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) will enable new types of aircraft to operate more cleanly, efficiently, and quietly, complemented by higher levels of autonomy and automation, and supported by air traffic management systems and infrastructure. The operations that these aircraft and systems are intended to conduct are designed to support missions that cover a varied set of use cases. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has been helping to lead the way in its AAM research through a broad portfolio of efforts that leverages multiple internal activities and external collaborations with industry and government. As the AAM concept has continued to advance, it has also become clear that there are very likely great benefits in its application to disaster response and the challenges posed by such complex events. In this application, NASA is leveraging its foundational work performed in partnership with the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) on integrated unmanned and manned aircraft operations in disaster response situations. The joint NASA and JAXA work, along with the ongoing AAM efforts, have contributed to the formulation of a new project that will expand the scope of technology integration with an initial focus on wildland firefighting.

advanced air mobility↗
NASA NTRS2016

The Human Challenges of Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems

Remotely Piloted Aircraft (RPA) 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. 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. 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.

Hobbs, Alan↗
NASA NTRS2019

Advancing the Standards for Unmanned Air System Communications, Navigation and Surveillance

Under NASA program NNA16BD84C, new architectures were identified and developed for supporting reliable and secure Communications, Navigation and Surveillance (CNS) needs for Unmanned Air Systems (UAS) operating in both controlled and uncontrolled airspace. An analysis of architectures for the two categories of airspace and an implementation technology readiness analysis were performed. These studies produced NASA reports that have been made available in the public domain and have been briefed in previous conferences. We now consider how the products of the study are influencing emerging directions in the aviation standards communities. The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Communications Panel (CP), Working Group I (WG-I) is currently developing a communications network architecture known as the Aeronautical Telecommunications Network with Internet Protocol Services (ATN/IPS). The target use case for this service is secure and reliable Air Traffic Management (ATM) for manned aircraft operating in controlled airspace. However, the work is more and more also considering the emerging class of airspace users known as Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (RPAS), which refers to certain UAS classes. In addition, two Special Committees (SCs) in the Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics (RTCA) are developing Minimum Aviation System Performance Standards (MASPS) and Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) for UAS. RTCA SC-223 is investigating an Internet Protocol Suite (IPS) and AeroMACS aviation data link for interoperable (INTEROP) UAS communications. Meanwhile, RTCA SC-228 is working to develop Detect And Avoid (DAA) equipment and a Command and Control (C2) Data Link MOPS establishing LBand and C-Band solutions. These RTCA Special Committees along with ICAO CP WG/I are therefore overlapping in terms of the Communication, Navigation and Surveillance (CNS) alternatives they are seeking to provide for an integrated manned- and unmanned air traffic management service as well as remote pilot command and control. This paper presents UAS CNS architecture concepts developed under the NASA program that apply to all three of the aforementioned committees. It discusses the similarities and differences in the problem spaces under consideration in each committee, and considers the application of a common set of CNS alternatives that can be widely applied. As the works of these committees progress, it is clear that the overlap will need to be addressed to ensure a consistent and safe framework for worldwide aviation. In this study, we discuss similarities and differences in the various operational models and show how the CNS architectures developed under the NASA program apply.

Ponchak, Denise S.↗
NASA NTRS1972

B-70 Aircraft Study

Volume 2 of the final report on the B-70 aircraft study is presented here. The B-70 Program, at the onset, was a full weapon system capable of sustained Mach 3 flight for the major portion of its design missions. The weapon system was to enter the SAC inventory as an RS-70 with the first intercontinental resonnaissance/bomber wing scheduled to go operational in July, 1964. After several redirections, a two XB-70 air vehicle program emerged with its prime objective being to demonstrate the technical feasibility of sustained Mach 3 flight. This section describes the original Weapon System 110A concepts, the evolution of the RS-70 design, and the XB-70 air vehicles which demonstrated the design, fabrication, and technical feasibility of long range Mach 3 flights at high altitude. The data presented shows that a very large step forward in the state-of-the-art of manned aircraft design was achieved during the B-70 development program and that advances were made and incorporated in every area, including design, materials application, and manufacturing techniques.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1988

Advanced piloted aircraft flight control system design methodology. Volume 1: Knowledge base

The development of a comprehensive and electric methodology for conceptual and preliminary design of flight control systems is presented and illustrated. The methodology is focused on the design stages starting with the layout of system requirements and ending when some viable competing system architectures (feedback control structures) are defined. The approach is centered on the human pilot and the aircraft as both the sources of, and the keys to the solution of, many flight control problems. The methodology relies heavily on computational procedures which are highly interactive with the design engineer. To maximize effectiveness, these techniques, as selected and modified to be used together in the methodology, form a cadre of computational tools specifically tailored for integrated flight control system preliminary design purposes. While theory and associated computational means are an important aspect of the design methodology, the lore, knowledge and experience elements, which guide and govern applications are critical features. This material is presented as summary tables, outlines, recipes, empirical data, lists, etc., which encapsulate a great deal of expert knowledge. Much of this is presented in topical knowledge summaries which are attached as Supplements. The composite of the supplements and the main body elements constitutes a first cut at a a Mark 1 Knowledge Base for manned-aircraft flight control.

Mcruer, Duane T.↗
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 NTRS2012

Simulation and Flight Test Capability for Testing Prototype Sense and Avoid System Elements

NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC) and The MITRE Corporation (MITRE) have developed, and successfully demonstrated, an integrated simulation-to-flight capability for evaluating sense and avoid (SAA) system elements. This integrated capability consists of a MITRE developed fast-time computer simulation for evaluating SAA algorithms, and a NASA LaRC surrogate unmanned aircraft system (UAS) equipped to support hardware and software in-the-loop evaluation of SAA system elements (e.g., algorithms, sensors, architecture, communications, autonomous systems), concepts, and procedures. The fast-time computer simulation subjects algorithms to simulated flight encounters/ conditions and generates a fitness report that records strengths, weaknesses, and overall performance. Reviewed algorithms (and their fitness report) are then transferred to NASA LaRC where additional (joint) airworthiness evaluations are performed on the candidate SAA system-element configurations, concepts, and/or procedures of interest; software and hardware components are integrated into the Surrogate UAS research systems; and flight safety and mission planning activities are completed. Onboard the Surrogate UAS, candidate SAA system element configurations, concepts, and/or procedures are subjected to flight evaluations and in-flight performance is monitored. The Surrogate UAS, which can be controlled remotely via generic Ground Station uplink or automatically via onboard systems, operates with a NASA Safety Pilot/Pilot in Command onboard to permit safe operations in mixed airspace with manned aircraft. An end-to-end demonstration of a typical application of the capability was performed in non-exclusionary airspace in October 2011; additional research, development, flight testing, and evaluation efforts using this integrated capability are planned throughout fiscal year 2012 and 2013.

Howell, Charles T.↗
NASA NTRS2023

Safety Case for Small Uncrewed Aircraft Systems (sUAS) Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) Operations at NASA Langley Research Center

This Technical Memorandum (TM) is written to provide for dissemination of the methods and safety considerations for operations of small Uncrewed Aerial Systems (sUAS) Beyond Visual Line-of-Sight (BVLOS)at NASA Langley Research Center. It includes the Safety Case used to acquire a BVLOS Certificate of Authorization (COA) from the FAA and is being published to enable others to benefit from this work. The intended operations, subject to approval from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), will include a combination of Within Visual Line of Sight (WVLOS) and Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) flights, comprising of at most five sUAS operating concurrently, with no more than three operating BVLOS. Flights will occur in a subset of the Langley Air Force Base (LAFB) Class D airspace (KLFI) at a maximum altitude of 400 ft AGL. Most operations within this subset will take place in the City Environment Range Testing for Autonomous Integrated Navigation (CERTAIN) Range. The CERTAIN Range includes airspace inside the borders of NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC). Additional airspace over the northern section of CERTAIN will be requested as part of the Certificate of Authorization (COA). NASA LaRC BVLOS operations on the CERTAIN Range can be broken down into five critical components needed to meet the 14 CFR § 91.113 see and avoid requirement: 1) procedural deconfliction with LAFB for UAS operations at or below 400 ft and manned aircraft at or above 900’ AGL; 2) ground equipment for detection of intruder aircraft and to support communications between crewmembers ; 3) sUAS vehicles with advanced onboard automation capable of autonomously maintaining safe separation; 4) BVLOS standardized operating procedures (SOPs); 5) and personnel to execute the flight operations in accordance with the SOPs and respond to airborne contingencies. The introduction of new ground equipment includes the use of the Remote Operations for Autonomous Missions (ROAM) UAS Operations Center, development and use of an Integrated Airspace Display (IAD), use of the L-STAR and GA-9120 radars, and the incorporation of standardized Vertiports. The ROAM Operations Center will be the central point for all BVLOS sUAS operations. All command and control (C2), voice communications and airspace awareness displays will reside inside ROAM. The IAD will provide raw data from ADS-B, FLARM, radar tracks and telemetered GPS vehicle positions for interpretation by an Airspace Monitor. The radars will search the class D airspace around the CERTAIN Range and serve as a backup to procedural deconfliction procedures coordinated with LAFB. In the event of a procedural deconfliction breakdown, radar detections of non-participating aircraft will be available so that the 91.113 see and avoid requirement can still be safely met. Finally, the incorporation of Vertiports will have video and network connectivity that enables large numbers of sUAS launches and recoveries from a single location. This is a continuation of the remote command and control of unpiloted aircraft component focused on evaluating unpiloted aircraft flight crew roles and responsibilities, control interfaces and the associated data links needed to operate a fleet of aircraft within a UAM Ecosystem. This work supports the development of future aviation operational concepts based on an Urban Air Mobility Maturity Level (UML) 4 environment (Patterson, 2020). It is assumed that future airspace will include hundreds of simultaneous aircraft operations within the airspace, therefore scalable operations are essential for enabling this future airspace to become a reality. Follow on work includes envisioned flights that expand operations beyond the CERTAIN range and lead to an effective Maritime Surveillance capability.

Matthew W Coldsnow↗
NASA NTRS2021

UAS Integration in the NAS Flight Test 6: Full Mission Results

Recent standards development efforts for the integration of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) into the National Airspace System (NAS) such as those in RTCA Inc. Special Committee 228 (SC-228) have focused on relatively large UAS transitioning to and from Class A airspace. In an effort to expand the range of vehicle classes that can access the NAS, the NASA UAS Integration in the NAS project has investigated Low Size, Weight, and Power (Low SWaP) technologies that would allow smaller UAS to detect-and-avoid (DAA) traffic. Through batch and human in the loop (HITL) simulation studies, the UAS Integration in the NAS DAA subproject have identified candidate performance standards that would contribute to enabling extended Low SWaP, UAS operations under 10,000 feet. These candidate performance standards include minimum field of regard (FOR) values for Low SWaP air surveillance sensors as well as a DAA well-clear (DWC) definition which can be applied to non-cooperative traffic to reduce the required maneuver initiation range. To test the assumptions of the project’s simulation studies and validate the candidate performance standards, a live flight research event was executed at NASA Armstrong Flight Research Center. The UAS Integration in the NAS Project Flight Test 6 Full Mission sought to characterize UAS pilot responses to traffic conflicts using a representative Low SWAP DAA system in an operational NAS environment. To achieve this, live, virtual and constructive distributed environment (LVC-DE) elements were combined to simulate a sector of Oakland center airspace and induce encounters with a live, manned aircraft. A Navmar Applied Sciences Tigershark XP was used as the UAS ownship and was integrated into the test architecture to enable it to be controlled from a Vigilant Spirit Control Station (VSCS) research ground control station. Qualified UAS pilots were recruited to act as subject pilots under test (SPUT) to control the Tigershark XP in a simulated mission while coordinating with a participating air traffic controller in simulated airspace. The intruder speed, intruder equipage and encounter geometry were varied between six scripted encounters per SPUT. Various metrics were collected including pilot reaction time from the onset of DAA alert, ATC coordination rate, probability and severity of losses of DAA well clear, and subjective ratings of system acceptability. The implications of these results on the development of standards for Low SWAP DAA systems will be discussed.

UAV↗
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↗
DOE OSTI2020

Drone Video Platform—Collision Avoidance, Situational Awareness, and Communications

Small unmanned aerial systems are ideal for delivering sensors into areas that are inaccessible or too dangerous for human entry or manned aircraft over-flights. The systems can fly low and slow for enhanced sensitivity and in tight spaces where ordinary aircraft could never fit. We have configured and flown sensor payloads for radiation, chemical, and optical detection on small fixed-wing and rotary-wing aircraft. All the sensor packages provide telemetry, GPS coordinates, LIDAR distance ranging, and absolute time of day to microsecond accuracy. Payload weights range from less than 1 kg up to 5.5 kg. Currently, communications are over 2.4 GHz and 915 MHz radios, as well as over 4G LTE cellular data links. Real-time data feeds from the sensor payloads to web browser clients anywhere in the world are possible via a virtual EC2 server on the Amazon AWS cloud. In FY 2019, the Nevada National Security Site teamed with Virginia Tech, H3D Corp., and Unmanned Systems, Inc. to accomplish the four flight missions described in this report. A large part of this year’s mission goals were to demonstrate the ability to fly beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS).

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗