Results for “MOPS” — Page 6

NASA NTRS2019

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Integration in the National Airspace System (NAS) Project: ACAS Xu HITL Overview

This presentation provides an overview of a recently completed human-in-the-loop simulation, conducted as part of the Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Integration in the National Airspace System (NAS) Project. This study examined how to present resolution advisories (RAs) issued by Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS) Xu, which can be in the vertical dimension, the horizontal dimension, or both (i.e., "blended"). The study varied the location of the ACAS Xu traffic information - it was either presented within an 'integrated' display or a 'standalone' display, where the traffic information was separated from the vehicle control interfaces and navigational information. The presentation covers the test set-up, scenario design, and facilities utilized in this experiment. The primary dependent variables are listed, but no detailed results are included in this outbrief since data analysis is still underway. Goal: assess ACAS Xu Run 5 in a HITL setting to measure pilot & system performance – RWC alerting and guidance – RA alerting and guidance • Horizontal-only, vertical-only, and blended RAs • Strengthening RAs, reversals and added/removed RAs during blended maneuvers – Incorporate realistic sensor noise into the simulation environment – Compare pilot and DAA system performance back to NASA’s Phase 1 DAA MOPS V&V HITL • We leveraged the findings of an engineering analysis conducted in March to help inform how to implement the Xu logic – Part 1 focused on how to display horizontal-only, vertical-only and blended RAs – Part 2 focused on how to display automated RA responses Xu Engineering Analysis Results Part 1 objectives: – Characterize pilot responses to (canned) ACAS Xu RAs in a variety of display configurations • With vs. Without text accompaniment • Simple vs. ‘Advanced’ aural alerting • Results – Pilots struggled to meet 5 seconds initial response requirement • Particularly against horizontal and blended RAs – Pilots failed to respond more quickly to secondary RAs • Expected response time to subsequent RAs = 2.5 seconds No clear effect of the different alerting conditions on response times – Response times primarily driven by RA type • Pilots demonstrated high level of compliance with RAs and self-reported Xu alerting and guidance as being acceptable – 1/5 reported text as being necessary – 4/5 wanted the aural alert to retain the original RA sequence (i.e., issue a follow-on RA second rather than first) – 4/5 wanted to retain the “Maintain Heading/Vertical Speed” aural alert in the event that the pilot reached their target response at the time of secondary RA Based on these results, we decided on the following for the HITL experimental design: – Incorporated an ‘auto-fill’ feature in Vigilant Spirit that removes the need for pilots to manually enter a heading or altitude for RAs • Pilots only have to click ‘Send’ to upload the RA target heading/altitude – Did not include an RA ‘text box’ • The auto-fill feature largely replaces the purpose of the text box – Using a combination of the ‘Basic’ and ‘Advanced’ aural alerting • In case of blended maneuvers will issue “Maintain Heading/Vertical Rate” if pilot has reached 1st RA target at the time the 2nd RA is issued • Integration and testing with Xu Run 5 also resulted in us adding display logic to modify how horizontal RAs are presented – Target heading was shown to update at approx. 1 Hz making it difficult for pilots to implement – Display logic limited horizontal RA strengthening to once every 5 seconds • Did not impact timing of reversals, new RAs (i.e., blended), or CoC Engineering Analysis Results

human systems integration↗

NASA NTRS2018

Sensor Uncertainty Mitigation and Dynamic Well Clear Volumes in DAIDALUS

This paper presents recent updates to DAIDALUS (Detect & Avoid Alerting Logic for Unmanned Systems), a detect and avoid (DAA) software package for the integration of civil UAS into the airspace. DAIDALUS is the reference implementation of detect and avoid for unmanned aircraft systems chosen by RTCA Special Committee 228 (SC-228), and it is included in its corresponding Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) document, DO-365. This paper reports on the integration into DAIDALUS of two new capabilities, namely dynamic well clear volumes and sensor uncertainty mitigation.'

Narkawicz, Anthony↗

NASA NTRS2019

TAO Test Vector Evaluation Rev. 1

A group of encounter sets is evaluated as a standard for defining and refining both performance-based and functional-based terminal area MOPS requirements. DAIDALUS-alerting is used together with a variety of sensor configurations: (1) ADS-B level surveillance, (2) TCAS II, (3) ground-based RADAR with three different sets of error parameters.

Adami, Tony↗

NASA NTRS2020

Detect-and-Avoid: Flight Test 6 Scripted Encounters Data Analysis

The Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) in the National Airspace System (NAS) project conducted Flight Test 6 (FT6) in 2019. The ultimate goal of this flight test was to produce data to inform RTCA SC-228's Phase II Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) for Detect and Avoid (DAA) and Low Size, Weight, and Power Sensors. This report documents the analysis of scripted encounters' data. Scripted encounters own were analyzed and categorized based on the outcome of alert, maneuver guidance, and effectiveness of pilots' maneuver in resolving conflicts. Results indicate that UAS pilots' decisions as well as intruder maneuvers are leading factors that contribute to ineffective DAA maneuvers. Results also show that adding buffers to the DAA's suggested minimum turn angle improves effectiveness of the DAA maneuvers.

Wang, Wei-Ching↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) In-Trail Procedures (ITP)

Aircraft in oceanic and remote non-radar airspace frequently fly for extended periods of time in the same direction, at the same time, along similar flight paths as other aircraft. Since there is no radar surveillance, controllers use procedural separation to ensure that aircraft remain separated. Procedural separation distances are typically larger than radar separation distances and as a result aircraft operating in oceanic airspace are sometimes held at non-optimal flight levels due to conflicting traffic at intervening flight levels. Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) In-Trail Procedures (ITP) were developed to enable flight level change maneuvers that would otherwise not be possible with current procedural separation standards. Aircraft operators choosing to equip with an ADS-B transceiver and an appropriate onboard decision support system would be able to take advantage of these procedures when operating in proximity to aircraft equipped with a suitable ADS-B transmitter (“ADS-B Out”). The ability to perform in-trail maneuvers to achieve more time at optimum altitudes could result in more efficient and predictable flight profiles thereby saving fuel and in some cases allowing operators to make beneficial operational decisions. NASA first began developing ADS-B ITP in 2003 as a result of a desire to develop methodologies, concepts, and procedures to reduce separation requirements for future air transportation systems using airborne ADS-B. The objectives were to provide insight into the details necessary to reduce separation requirements for the future and to develop applications that could provide incentives for operators to voluntarily equip with transformational technologies. From 2003 to 2008, NASA conducted research that supported the development of ITP including batch simulations, human-in-the-loop experiments and avionics and separation standards development. This research showed enough maturity and benefit that in 2008, the FAA Surveillance and Broadcast Services (SBS) program adopted ADS-B ITP as one of their three key, near-term applications to make use of ADS-B-In. The FAA developed an agreement with NASA to transition the technology and established an FAA project for the purpose of performing an operational trial of ADS-B ITP in revenue service in the summer of 2011. The objectives of the project are to a) validate the operational performance and economic benefits of ITP; and b) develop and validate ADS-B ITP Minimum Operational Performance Specifications (MOPS) material. As a part of this project, the FAA established agreements with United Airlines and Honeywell. The agreements include the work necessary for the development, certification and installation of onboard systems for twelve United Airlines 747-400s. ITP system development is nearly complete and certification activities are underway. The FAA project has also been working with Oakland Oceanic Control Center (ZOA) and the FAA’s Oceanic and Offshore Operations Office to develop controller procedures and safety analyses that are required to support the flight trial. The FAA has also been working on the development of an ITP Operational Specification that should be approved this April. The presentation will cover some of the key aspects of the development, challenges, and integration required to successfully transition ADS-B ITP from a concept in 2003 to flight trials in revenue service in 2011.

Kenneth M Jones↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Examination of Two Non-Cooperative Detect and Avoid Well Clear Definitions

NASA’s Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration into the National Airspace System (UAS in the NAS) project examines the technical barriers associated with the operation of UAS in civil airspace. The present study explored the differential effects of two candidate non-cooperative Detect-and-Avoid Well Clear (DWC)definitions on pilot and system performance in a human-in-the-loop simulation. Active-duty UAS pilots were recruited to maintain DWC against representative Class 4 encounter types with a low size, weight, and power (SWaP) radar declaration range of 3.5 nautical miles (nmi). Objective performance indicated that pilots could consistently maintain DWC against non-cooperative intruders with either DWC candidate, with negligible differences in response times and separation performance against caution and warning-level threats. While losses of DWC were avoided at rates comparable to Phase 1 findings, pilots uploaded their responses to caution-level alerts over 5 seconds faster in the current setup relative to Phase 1. Encounters with faster closure rates were susceptible to shortened caution-level alert durations, especially when employing the DWC criterion with the additional ‘Tau’ (temporal) component. Consequently, caution-level threats frequently elevated to warning-level status (nearly twice as often with theTau candidate). The variable caution alert durations appeared to impact pilots’ coordination with air traffic control (ATC), as ATC approval rates were lower with the ‘Tau’and ‘Disc’ candidates relative to Phase 1 research. Ultimately, the increased alerting time enabled by the Disc candidate deemed it more suitable for any reductions to the assumed radar declaration range requirement, which was re-evaluated in a follow-on study. Findings from this study will inform Phase 2 Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS)development for UAS with alternative surveillance equipment and performance capabilities.

Kevin J Monk↗

NASA NTRS2020

An Evaluation of UAS Pilot Workload and Acceptability Ratings with Four Simulated Radar Declaration Ranges

Currently, minimum operating standards (MOPS) are being developed for a broader range of UAS types, including smaller UAS that will feature onboard sensors that are low in size, weight, and power (Low SWaP). These sensors will have limited declaration ranges compared to ones typically found on medium-to-large UAS used to detect non-cooperative aircraft. A human-in-the-loop (HITL) study was conducted examining four possible radar declaration ranges (i.e., 1.5 nm, 2 nm, 2.5 nm, and 3 nm) for a potential low SWaP sensor with a DAA system. Participants had lower workload, particularly workload associated with temporal demand and effort. Furthermore, participants reported better ability to remain DAA well clear within the larger declaration range conditions, such as the 2.5 nm and 3 nm.

UAS↗

NASA NTRS2020

UAS Integration in the NAS Project: Overview of Flight Test Series 6

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration in the National Airspace System (UAS-NAS) Project has conducted a series of flight test campaigns intended to support the reduction of barriers that prevent unmanned aircraft from flying without the required waivers from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The 2019 Flight Test Series 6 (FT6) campaign furthered this path and supported three test configurations: 1) Radar Characterization, 2) Scripted Encounters and 3) Full Mission. Radar Characterization assessed the performance of Honeywell’s low size, weight, and power (low SWaP) radar system; Scripted Encounters investigated the timing of Detect and Avoid (DAA) alerting thresholds using a Department of Defense (DoD) Group 3 unmanned aircraft system (UAS) equipped with low SWaP sensors and three different live intruder aircraft flown at varying encounter geometries; and Full Mission validated human-in-the-loop simulations by collecting pilot performance data from a ground control station while controlling a live unmanned aircraft on a mission in both virtual and live air traffic controlled airspace. The subject pilot observed a research display that presented DAA advisories to maintain separation from live and virtual aircraft. The test was conducted over a twenty-week period within the R-2508 special use airspace located near Edwards Air Force Base (EAFB), CA. Over 240 encounters were flown during the test series and FT6 proved to be invaluable for the purposes of planning, managing, and executing this type of integrated flight test in both live and virtual environments. Data collected from FT6 was provided to the RTCA Special Committee 228 (SC-228) to help inform the Phase 2 Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS). FT6 was the final test series for the UAS-NAS project that began in 2012. This paper provides an overview of FT6 and its success can be directly attributed to the diligent work of the men and women who supported this effort.

UAS in the NAS↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Human-in-the-Loop Evaluation of ACAS Xu

As part of the Phase 2 UAS DAA MOPS, a Class 3 DAA system has been under development with the potential to resolve many of the limitations of Class 1 and 2 systems. A Class 3 system would combine the DAA and CA functions into a single, unified system, and would also extend the CA capabilities relative to TCAS II. Class 3 is enabled by the Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS) XU, a next generation CA system developed specifically for UAS operations. Unlike Class 2 systems, ACAS XU provides CA protection against both cooperative and non-cooperative traffic. Class 3 systems also expand the CA logic to allow horizontal RAs in addition to vertical RAs. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate ACAS XU in a real-time, HITL simulation. The latest version of ACAS XU was implemented and pilots were tasked with responding to scripted traffic conflicts over the course of four experimental trials. Variables included the location of the ACAS XU guidance information (standalone vs. integrated) and traffic conflict type (DAA or CA threat). Sixteen active UAS pilots participated in the study, with ATC and ‘pseudo’ pilots acting as airspace confederates. Results showed that pilots were able to maintain DWC with ACAS XU at a rate comparable to previous research (~5%). Compliance rates to initial RAs were high (~90%) but dropped significantly when the target heading value issued during horizontal RAs were updated over the course of an encounter (30-70%). The implications of these findings on the display, alerting, and guidance requirements for Class 3 systems will be discussed.

unmanned aircraft systems↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Human-in-the-Loop Evaluation of ACAS Xu

As part of the Phase 2 UAS DAA MOPS, a Class 3 DAA system has been under development with the potential to resolve many of the limitations of Class 1 and 2 systems. A Class 3 system would combine the DAA and CA functions into a single, unified system, and would also extend the CA capabilities relative to TCAS II. Class 3 is enabled by the Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS) XU, a next generation CA system developed specifically for UAS operations. Unlike Class 2 systems, ACAS XU provides CA protection against both cooperative and non-cooperative traffic. Class 3 systems also expand the CA logic to allow horizontal RAs in addition to vertical RAs. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate ACAS XU in a real-time, HITL simulation. The latest version of ACAS XU was implemented and pilots were tasked with responding to scripted traffic conflicts over the course of four experimental trials. Variables included the location of the ACAS XU guidance information (standalone vs. integrated) and traffic conflict type (DAA or CA threat). Sixteen active UAS pilots participated in the study, with ATC and ‘pseudo’ pilots acting as airspace confederates. Results showed that pilots were able to maintain DWC with ACAS XU at a rate comparable to previous research (~5%). Compliance rates to initial RAs were high (~90%) but dropped significantly when the target heading value issued during horizontal RAs were updated over the course of an encounter (30-70%). The implications of these findings on the display, alerting, and guidance requirements for Class 3 systems will be discussed.

unmanned aircraft systems↗

NASA NTRS2020

A Human-in-theLoop Evaluation of ACAS Xu

As part of the Phase 2 UAS DAA MOPS, a Class 3 DAA system has been under development with the potential to resolve many of the limitations of Class 1 and 2 systems. A Class 3 system would combine the DAA and CA functions into a single, unified system, and would also extend the CA capabilities relative to TCAS II. Class 3 is enabled by the Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS) XU, a next generation CA system developed specifically for UAS operations. Unlike Class 2 systems, ACAS XU provides CA protection against both cooperative and non-cooperative traffic. Class 3 systems also expand the CA logic to allow horizontal RAs in addition to vertical RAs. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate ACAS XU in a real-time, HITL simulation. The latest version of ACAS XU was implemented and pilots were tasked with responding to scripted traffic conflicts over the course of four experimental trials. Variables included the location of the ACAS XU guidance information (standalone vs. integrated) and traffic conflict type (DAA or CA threat). Sixteen active UAS pilots participated in the study, with ATC and ‘pseudo’ pilots acting as airspace confederates. Results showed that pilots were able to maintain DWC with ACAS XU at a rate comparable to previous research (~5%). Compliance rates to initial RAs were high (~90%) but dropped significantly when the target heading value issued during horizontal RAs were updated over the course of an encounter (30-70%). The implications of these findings on the display, alerting, and guidance requirements for Class 3 systems will be discussed.

unmanned aircraft systems↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Evaluation of UAS Pilot Workload and Acceptability Ratings with Four Simulated Radar Declaration Ranges

Currently, minimum operational performance standards (MOPS) are being developed for a broader range of unmanned aircraft system (UAS) platforms, including smaller UAS that will feature onboard sensors that are low in size, weight, and power, otherwise known as low SWaP. The low SWaP sensors used to detect non-cooperative traffic will have limited declaration ranges compared to those designed for medium-to-large UAS. A human-in-the-loop (HITL) study was conducted examining four possible radar declaration ranges (i.e., 1.5 NM, 2 NM, 2.5 NM, and 3 NM) for a potential low SWaP sensor with a detect and avoid (DAA) system encountering various non-cooperative encounters in Oakland Center airspace. Participants had lower workload, particularly workload associated with temporal demand and effort, in scenarios that featured larger declaration ranges. Furthermore, participants reported better ability to remain DAA well clear within the larger declaration range conditions, specifically with the 2.5 NM and 3 NM conditions.

UAS↗

NASA NTRS2020

An Evaluation of UAS Pilot Workload and Acceptability Ratings with Four Simulated Radar Declaration Ranges

Currently, minimum operational performance standards (MOPS) are being developed for a broader range of unmanned aircraft system (UAS) platforms, including smaller UAS that will feature onboard sensors that are low in size, weight, and power, otherwise known as low SWaP. The low SWaP sensors used to detect non-cooperative traffic will have limited declaration ranges compared to those designed for medium-to-large UAS. A human-in-the-loop (HITL) study was conducted examining four possible radar declaration ranges (i.e., 1.5 NM, 2 NM, 2.5 NM, and 3 NM) for a potential low SWaP sensor with a detect and avoid (DAA) system encountering various non-cooperative encounters in Oakland Center airspace. Participants had lower workload, particularly workload associated with temporal demand and effort, in scenarios that featured larger declaration ranges. Furthermore, participants reported better ability to remain DAA well clear within the larger declaration range conditions, specifically with the 2.5 NM and 3 NM conditions.

UAS↗

NASA NTRS2021

Detect-and-Avoid Surveillance Range Requirements for Electro-Optical/Infra-Red Sensors

A detect-and-avoid (DAA) system provides surveillance, alerting, and maneuver guidance (referred to as guidance in this report) that are critical to an unmanned aircraft system’s (UAS) ability to maintain separation from manned aircraft and other unmanned aircraft. The last decade has seen significant progress in the development of DAA requirements, spearheaded by RTCA Special Committee 228 (SC228) and subsequently by other standards organizations such as EUROCAE and ASTM. SC-228’s development of DAA requirements assumes the UAS follows instrument flight rules (IFR) and has a remote pilot or operator in the loop. As of the publication of this document, the SC-228’s latest Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) for DAA, versioned as DO-365B [1], DAA systems use onboard and/or ground surveillance systems to detect traffic. The surveillance systems must detect both cooperative and non-cooperative air traffic. Cooperative traffic are vehicles that have a broadcasting transponder, while non-cooperative traffic do not, and so must be detected via radar or other sensors. A DAA system’s alerting and guidance functions alert the pilot/operator in the loop of potential hazards, such as intruder aircraft, and provide maneuver solutions which help the pilot/operator avoid or mitigate observed hazards. A UAS pilot is expected to coordinate with air traffic control (ATC) before executing a conflict avoidance maneuver if the type of alert is not urgent enough to require an immediate maneuver.

uncrewed aviation systems↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

DAA Use Case for Auto Cargo m:N Operations

A detect and avoid use-case was developed to highlight detect and avoid issues associated with m:N operations in the auto cargo domain. This work is being done in conjunction with industry partners and developed for the Operational Scenario and Environmental Description (OSED) for RTCA SC-228. The detect and avoid function is critical, required technology for unmanned aircraft to operation in the national airspace. RTCA SC-228 has published MOPS (phase 1 & 2) detailing the requirements and methods of compliance. This work will help address additional operational aspects of how/when DAA will be employed by unmanned systems. Specifically, this work focuses on “auto cargo” operations. Auto cargo, in this context, refers to regularly scheduled cargo-size aircraft that are flown remotely. The Remote Pilot In Command (RPIC), in this case, is responsible for multiple aircraft, flown simultaneously. The use-case details the use of DAA in this context, the potential issues and gaps that exist.

multi-vehicle control↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Surface Radiation Budget (SRB) Release 2 Shortwave 3 hourly Data in Native Format (SRB_REL2_SW_3HRLY)

The SRB data include the average upward and downward fluxes, photosynthetically active radiative flux, aerosol and cloud optical depth, cloud fraction, and solar zenith angle measured at three hourly intervals for each day for the entire globe between 07/01/1983 and 10/31/1995. These SW surface radiative parameters were derived with the Shortwave algorithm of the NASA World Climate Research Programme/Global Energy and Water-Cycle Experiment (WCRP/GEWEX) Surface Radiation Budget (SRB) Project. [Location=GLOBAL] [Temporal_Coverage: Start_Date=1983-07-01; Stop_Date=1998-07-26] [Spatial_Coverage: Southernmost_Latitude=-90; Northernmost_Latitude=90; Westernmost_Longitude=-180; Easternmost_Longitude=180] [Data_Resolution: Latitude_Resolution=1 degree; Longitude_Resolution=Ranges from 1 degree (tropics and subtropics) to 120 degrees (the poles).; Temporal_Resolution=3 hourly; Temporal_Resolution_Range=3 hourly].

ALL SKY SW SURFACE DOWNWARD DIFFUSE FLUX↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Surface Radiation Budget (SRB) Release 2 Shortwave 3 hourly Monthly Data in Native Format (SRB_REL2_SW_3HRLY_MONTHLY)

The SRB data include the average upward and downward fluxes, photosynthetically active radiative flux, aerosol and cloud optical depth, cloud fraction, and solar zenith angle at three hourly intervals for each day for the entire globe between 07/01/1983 and 10/31/1995. These parameters were derived with the Shortwave algorithm of the NASA World Climate Research Programme/Global Energy and Water-Cycle Experiment (WCRP/GEWEX) Surface Radiation Budget (SRB) Project. [Location=GLOBAL] [Temporal_Coverage: Start_Date=1983-07-01; Stop_Date=1998-07-26] [Spatial_Coverage: Southernmost_Latitude=-90; Northernmost_Latitude=90; Westernmost_Longitude=-180; Easternmost_Longitude=180] [Data_Resolution: Latitude_Resolution=1 degree; Longitude_Resolution=Ranges from 1 degree (tropics and subtropics 120 degrees (the poles); Temporal_Resolution=3 hourly; Temporal_Resolution_Range=3 hourly].

AEROSOL OPTICAL DEPTH↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Surface Radiation Budget (SRB) Release 2 Shortwave Daily Data in Native Format (SRB_REL2_SW_DAILY)

This data set contains upward and downward fluxes, photosynthetically active radiative flux, aerosol and cloud optical depth, cloud fraction, and solar zenith angle measured at three hourly intervals for each day for the entire globe between 07/01/1983 and 10/31/1995. These SW surface radiative parameters were derived with the Shortwave algorithm of the NASA World Climate Research Programme/Global Energy and Water-Cycle Experiment (WCRP/GEWEX) Surface Radiation Budget (SRB) Project. [Location=GLOBAL] [Temporal_Coverage: Start_Date=1983-07-01; Stop_Date=1998-07-26] [Spatial_Coverage: Southernmost_Latitude=-90; Northernmost_Latitude=90; Westernmost_Longitude=-180; Easternmost_Longitude=180] [Data_Resolution: Latitude_Resolution=1 degree; Longitude_Resolution=Ranges from 1 degree (tropics and subtropics) to 120 degrees (the poles).; Temporal_Resolution=daily; Temporal_Resolution_Range=daily].

ALL SKY SW SURFACE UPWARD FLUX↗