NASA NTRS2019
NASA’s Traffic Aware Planner (TAP) software is a research-prototype decision support tool that provides pilots with time- and fuel-saving route recommendations that optimize their current trajectory. The software runs on a first-of-a-kind system architecture onboard three aircraft in revenue service conducting operational evaluations with a major domestic airline. Therefore, significant NASA-internal testing is required prior to releasing the software to the partner airline. This paper describes a flight test plan that exercises the functionality of the TAP software in a representative operational environment, describes the system architecture developed and implemented for the NASA Langley HU-25A Guardian aircraft to support the test objectives, presents outcomes of the flight test campaign, and discusses use cases that demonstrate the value of flight testing for this activity.Research into flight path optimization of transport aircraft conducted by the National Aeronautics and SpaceAdministration (NASA) has produced an operational concept known as Traffic Aware Strategic Aircrew Requests(TASAR) [1, 2]. This near-term concept [3] provides the aircrew with a flight deck decision support tool known asthe Traffic Aware Planner (TAP). The TAP software leverages a growing number of information sources on the flightdeck to make time- and fuel-saving route optimization recommendations to the aircrew while en route. The aircrewcan then use the suggestions provided by the tool to make route change requests with a greater likelihood of acceptanceby air traffic control (ATC). Since TASAR is a concept intended for the current operational environment, it isintentionally designed to have no safety-critical impact or require any changes to current Federal AviationAdministration (FAA) rules and procedures [4, 5].The research prototype TAP system [6–8], explained further in Section III.C, continually incorporates up-to-dateaircraft state data from onboard avionics, as well as the latest position of surrounding traffic, the most recent windforecast, and the most recent convective weather forecast, in order to calculate candidate trajectory modifications thatimprove upon the current active route. These trajectories account for user-selectable objective functions [3] of reducedfuel burn, reduced flight time, or an airline-derived combination of factors known as trip cost. Previous analyses andsimulations have estimated substantial savings for airlines employing this technique within the U.S. National AirspaceSystem (NAS) [9–11]. Operational evaluations with Alaska Airlines seek to validate these projected benefits usingmeasured data while simultaneously providing benefits to the airline [12, 13].The TAP software has undergone a number of human-in-the-loop simulations [14] and flight test activities[15–17] in order to validate the operational concept, evaluate human factors considerations (e.g., workload, usability,distraction, etc.), and to assess the ability of the software to function in a representative operational environment (e.g.,connected to live avionics data, using in-flight internet connectivity, etc.). However, these simulations and flight testcampaigns did not account for the hardware architecture implemented on the three aircraft for Alaska Airlines’operational evaluations of the TAP software. Therefore, a need was identified to thoroughly test the functionality ofthe software in a similar hardware architecture to that of the partner airline’s aircraft. Information regarding testapparatus and environments used to evaluate TAP prior to testing on the HU-25A can be found in reference [18].A campaign of flight trials on a NASA aircraft, the HU-25A Guardian, was conducted to ensure that the researchprototype TAP system functions well in a configuration similar to the Alaska Airlines aircraft prior to deployment.This airborne, networked environment enables an assessment of the operational factors unique to the flight environment. Additionally, this activity evaluated the effectiveness and benefit of new TAP functionality andoperation in a relevant flight environment while allowing the rapid prototyping of new concepts and features.This paper is organized as follows: Section II discusses the details of the flight test plan, flight profiles, and theduties of personnel involved with conducting flight operations. Section III describes the test platform, avionicsequipage, and system architecture. Section IV presents a discussion of results, and Section V contains concludingremarks.