Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “flight rules.”

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 163 records · Page 9
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1980

Potential problems relative to TDRS/IUS tilt table elevation with failed VRCS

Operational concerns and preliminary solution alternatives related to elevating the inertial upper stage/tracking and data relay satellite (IUS/TDRS) with a failed orbiter vernier reaction control system (VRCS) are presented. Problems arise from the combination of TDRS thermal constraints and tilt table constraints (the primary reaction control system (PRCS) cannot be used to hold attitude while the tilt table is being elevated), and the problems are compounded by the minimum PRCS attitude deadband. The potential solution options are affected by the launch window, flight profile, crew procedures, vehicle capability and constraints, and flight rules.

Bell, J.↗
NASA NTRS1981

Automated pilot advisory system test and evaluation at Manassas Municipal Airport

In cooperation with the Federal Aviation Administration, NASA developed an experimental automated pilot advisory system (APAS) to provide airport and air traffic advisories at high density uncontrolled airports. The APAS concept is to utilize low cost automated systems to provide the necessary information for pilots to more safely plan and execute approach and landing at uncontrolled high density airports. The system is designed to be a natural extension of the procedural visual flight rules system used at uncontrolled airports and, as an advisory system, will enhance the "see-and-be-seen" rule and an evaluation of the APAS concept was obtained from pilots who used the system at the Manassas, Virginia airport. These evaluations and the system performance are presented.

Parks, J. L., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS1981

General aviation single pilot IFR autopilot study

Five levels of autopilot complexity were flown in a single engine instrument flight rules (IFR) simulation for several different IFR terminal operations. A comparison was made of the five levels of complexity ranging from no-autopilot to a fully coupled lateral and vertical guidance mode to determine the relative benefits vs. complexity/cost of state of the art autopilot capability in the IFR terminal area. Of the five levels tested, the heading select mode made the largest relative difference in decreasing workload and simplifying the approach task. It was also found that the largest number of blunders was detected with the most highly automated mode. The data also showed that, regardless of the autopilot mode, performance during an IFR approach was highly dependent on the type of approach being flown. These results indicate that automation can be useful when making IFR approaches in a high workload environment, but also that some disturbing trends are associated with some of the higher levels of automation found in state of the art autopilots.

Bergeron, H. P.↗
NASA NTRS1981

Use of Loran-C for general aviation aircraft navigation

Quantitative and qualitative observations were made on the Loran-C in general aviation aircraft. The evaluation of Loran-C for both cross country flights and nonprecision approaches was conducted under simulated instrument flight rules conditions. Particular emphasis was placed on the reliability and failure of Loran-C equipment as well as its susceptibility to atmospheric effects such as P static. Efforts were made to quantify the long term stability of the Loran-C time difference grid. Several E field antenna configurations were also evaluated in terms of performance. Significant results are reported.

Natarajan, K.↗
NASA NTRS1980

Midair collisions - The accidents, the systems, and the Realpolitik

Two midair collisions occurring in 1978 are described, and the air traffic control system and procedures in use at the time, human factors implications and political consequences of the accidents are examined. The first collision occurred in Memphis and involved a Falcon jet and a Cessna 150 in a situation in which the controllers handling each aircraft were not aware of the presence of the other aircraft until it was too late. The second occurred in San Diego four months later, when a Boeing 727 on a visual approach struck a Cessna 172 from the rear. Following the San Diego collision there arose a great deal of investigative activity, resulting in suggestions for tighter control on visual flight rules aircraft and the expansion of positive control airspace. These issues then led to a political battle involving general aviation, the FAA and the Congress. It is argued, however, that the collisions were in fact system-induced errors resulting from an air traffic control system which emphasizes airspace allocation and politics rather than the various human factors problems facing pilots and controllers.

Wiener, E. L.↗
NASA NTRS1981

Predictor symbology in computer-generated pictorial displays

The display under investigation, is a tunnel display for the four-dimensional commercial aircraft approach-to-landing under instrument flight rules. It is investigated whether more complex predictive information such as a three-dimensional perspective vehicle symbol, predicting the future vehicle position as well as future vehicle attitude angles, contributes to a better system response, and suitable predictor laws for the predictor motions, are formulated. Methods for utilizing the predictor symbol in controlling the forward velocity of the aircraft in four-dimensional approaches, are investigated. The simulator tests show, that the complex perspective vehicle symbol yields improved damping in the lateral response as compared to a flat two-dimensional predictor cross, but yields generally larger vertical deviations. Methods of using the predictor symbol in controlling the forward velocity of the vehicle are shown to be effective. The tunnel display with superimposed perspective vehicle symbol yields very satisfactory results and pilot acceptance in the lateral control but is found to be unsatisfactory in the vertical control, as a result of too large vertical path-angle deviations.

Grunwald, A. J.↗
NASA NTRS1982

Single pilot IFR accident data analysis

The aircraft accident data recorded and maintained by the National Transportation Safety Board for 1964 to 1979 were analyzed to determine what problems exist in the general aviation single pilot instrument flight rules environment. A previous study conducted in 1978 for the years 1964 to 1975 provided a basis for comparison. The purpose was to determine what changes, if any, have occurred in trends and cause-effect relationships reported in the earlier study. The increasing numbers have been tied to measures of activity to produce accident rates which in turn were analyzed in terms of change. Where anomalies or unusually high accident rates were encountered, further analysis was conducted to isolate pertinent patterns of cause factors and/or experience levels of involved pilots. The bulk of the effort addresses accidents in the landing phase of operations. A detailed analysis was performed on controlled/uncontrolled collisions and their unique attributes delineated. Estimates of day vs. night general aviation activity and accident rates were obtained.

Harris, D. F.↗
NASA NTRS1983

Study to determine the IFR operational profile and problems of the general aviation single pilot

General aviation single pilot operating under instrument flight rules (GA SPIFR) was studied. The objectives of the study were to (1) develop a GA SPIFR operational profile, (2) identify problems experienced by the GA SPIFR pilot, and (3) identify research tasks which have the potential for eliminating or reducing the severity of the problems. To obtain the information necessary to accomplish these objectives, a mail questionnaire survey of instrument rated pilots was conducted. The general aviation IFR single pilot operational profile and selected data analysis examples are presented.

Weislogel, G. S.↗
NASA NTRS1983

Longitudinal flying qualities criteria for single-pilot instrument flight operations

Modern estimation and control theory, flight testing, and statistical analysis were used to deduce flying qualities criteria for General Aviation Single Pilot Instrument Flight Rule (SPIFR) operations. The principal concern is that unsatisfactory aircraft dynamic response combined with high navigation/communication workload can produce problems of safety and efficiency. To alleviate these problems. The relative importance of these factors must be determined. This objective was achieved by flying SPIFR tasks with different aircraft dynamic configurations and assessing the effects of such variations under these conditions. The experimental results yielded quantitative indicators of pilot's performance and workload, and for each of them, multivariate regression was applied to evaluate several candidate flying qualities criteria.

Stengel, R. F.↗
NASA NTRS1983

Single pilot IFR accident data analysis

The aircraft accident data recorded by the National Transportation and Safety Board (NTSR) for 1964-1979 were analyzed to determine what problems exist in the general aviation (GA) single pilot instrument flight rule (SPIFR) environment. A previous study conducted in 1978 for the years 1964-1975 provided a basis for comparison. This effort was generally limited to SPIFR pilot error landing phase accidents but includes some SPIFR takeoff and enroute accident analysis as well as some dual pilot IFR accident analysis for comparison. Analysis was performed for 554 accidents of which 39% (216) occurred during the years 1976-1979.

Harris, D. F.↗
NASA NTRS1983

Study to determine the IFR operational profile and problems to the general aviation pilot

A study of the general aviation single pilot operating under instrument flight rules (GA SPIFR) has been conducted for NASA Langley Research Center. The objectives of the study were to (1) develop a GA SPIFR operational profile, (2) identify problems experienced by the GA SPIFR pilot, and (3) identify research tasks which have the potential for eliminating or reducing the severity of the problems. To obtain the information necessary to accomplish these objectives, a mail questionnaire survey of instrument rated pilots was conducted. Complete questionnaire data is reported in NASA CR-165805, "Statistical Summary: Study to Determine the IFR Operational Profile and Problems of the General Aviation Single Pilot'-Based upon the results of the GA SPIFR survey, this final report presents the general aviation IFR single pilot operational profile, illustrates selected data analysis, examples, identifies the problems which he is experiencing, and recommends further research.

Weislogel, S.↗
NASA NTRS1983

Proposed study to determine potential flight applications and human factors design guidelines of voice recognition/synthesis systems

An effort to evaluate the human factors aspects and potential of voice recognition/synthesis techniques and the application of present and near-future (5 years) voice recognition/synthesis systems as a pilot/aircraft cockpit interface capability in an operational environment is discussed. The analysis will emphasize applications for single pilot instrument flight rules operations but will also include applications for other categories of aircraft with various levels of complexity.

Bergeron, H. P.↗
NASA NTRS1984

Conceptual design and simulator implementation of an automatic terminal approach system

The pilot-machine interface with aircraft automation to increase the safety and utility of single-pilot IFR (instrument flight rules) operations is addressed. An automatic terminal approach system (ATAS), that uses stored instrument approach data to automatically tune aircraft radios and control the aircraft autopilot, was conceived as a means of improving this critical interface. The ATAS automatically flies instrument approach procedures, including the missed approach, and provides for easy pilot interaction to accommodate air traffic control radar vectors and altitude assignments. A research prototype of an ATAS was developed to the extent necessary for a simulation implementation and piloted evaluation. The development of the ATAS concept and the software algorithms is described.

Hinton, D. A.↗
NASA NTRS1984

General Aviation Technology Conference, Hampton, VA, July 10-12, 1984, Technical Papers

The present conference on general aviation aircraft design considers the performance tradeoffs involved in two- and three-control surface aerodynamic configurations, wing design criteria for increased resistance to spins, the performance levels obtained by flight and wind tunnel tests of an 'electroimpulse' deicing system, and the chracteristics of lightning strikes experienced by the NASA F-106B research aircraft. Also considered are the application of speech recognition and synthesis systems to general aviation cockpits, control and display requirements for single-pilot Instrument Flight Rules, pilot interfacing with advanced avionics and automated cockpit systems, the feasibility of sidestick controllers for general aviation aircraft, the acoustic prediction methods incorporated by the NASA Generalized Advanced Propeller Analysis System, and the adhesively bonded structure of the Citation II business jet aircraft.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1984

NASA Ames-Dryden T-37 demonstration comments

A homemade peripheral vision horizon device (PVHD) made from an eight-ball attitude indicator, with a slit cut at the equator of the eight ball, and a light source at its center that was used on a I-37 for several years is discussed. The instrument produced a sharp white line about one-fourth of an inch that extended completely across the cockpit from about the left to the right quarterpanels. The line remained parallel to the real horizon during all maneuvers. Its brightness and vertical distance from the horizon were adjustable in flight, as was the lateral center-of-rotation in later flights. Flight demonstrations were done on visual flight rules (VFR) moonless nights and over terrain with few lights. Pilot responses were mostly favorable to enthusiastic, with no negative reactions. Problem areas noted were the upright-inverted ambiguity; one pilot recovered inverted following an unusual attitude exercise and a general deterioration in the naturalness of cuing at bank angles greater than 60 deg or pitch attitudes greater than 30 deg.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1984

Aircraft automation - The problem of the pilot interface

In recent years, aviation has been experiencing a rapid growth. This growth is expected to continue, and aircraft operations in the IFR (instrument flight rules) environment, for example, are predicted to increase dramatically in the next 10 to 12 years. However, it has been found the IFR accidents are increasing at about the same rate as IFR operations, because an associated high workload can lead to human error. For this reason, NASA and others are exploring the use of aircraft systems technology as a means for reducing the pilot workload and enhancing the safety and utility of the aircraft operations. However, recent research has shown that automation, implemented with insufficient consideration to the human factors interface, can frequently create more problems than it solves. Some of this research is discussed, examples of the encountered problems are shown, and solutions regarding the arising problems are suggested.

Bergeron, H. P.↗
NASA NTRS1986

In-Flight Simulator for IFR Training

Computer-controlled unit feeds navigation signals to airplane instruments. Electronic training system allows students to learn to fly according to instrument flight rules (IFR) in uncrowded airspace. New system self-contained IFR simulator carried aboard training plane. Generates signals and commands for standard instruments on airplane, including navigational receiver, distance-measuring equipment, automatic direction finder, a marker-beacon receiver, altimeter, airspeed indicator, and heading indicator.

Parker, L. C.↗