Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Instrument 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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1981

Development and evaluation of a prototype in-flight instrument flight rules (IFR) procedures trainer

An in-flight instrument flight rules (IFR) procedures trainer capable of providing simulated indications of instrument flight in a typical general aviation aircraft independent of ground based navigation aids was developed. The IFR navaid related instruments and circuits from an ATC 610J table top simulator were installed in a Cessna 172 aircraft and connected to its electrical power and pitot static systems. The benefits expected from this hybridization concept include increased safety by reducing the number of general aviation aircraft conducting IFR training flights in congested terminal areas, and reduced fuel use and instruction costs by lessening the need to fly to and from navaid equipped airports and by increased efficiency of the required in-flight training. Technical feasibility was demonstrated and the operational feasibility of the concept was evaluated. Results indicated that the in-flight simulator is an effective training device for teaching IFR procedural skills.

Aaron, J. B., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS1987

The effects of display and autopilot functions on pilot workload for Single Pilot Instrument Flight Rule (SPIFR) operations

An analytical and experimental research program was conducted to develop criteria for pilot interaction with advanced controls and displays in single pilot instrument flight rules (SPIFR) operations. The analytic phase reviewed fundamental considerations for pilot workload taking into account existing data, and using that data to develop a divided attention SPIFR pilot workload model. The pilot model was utilized to interpret the two experimental phases. The first experimental phase was a flight test program that evaluated pilot workload in the presence of current and near-term displays and autopilot functions. The second experiment was conducted on a King Air simulator, investigating the effects of co-pilot functions in the presence of very high SPIFR workload. The results indicate that the simplest displays tested were marginal for SPIFR operations. A moving map display aided the most in mental orientation, but had inherent deficiencies as a stand alone replacement for an HSI. Autopilot functions were highly effective for reducing pilot workload. The simulator tests showed that extremely high workload situations can be adequately handled when co-pilot functions are provided.

Hoh, Roger H.↗
NASA NTRS1983

Control/display trade-off study for single-pilot instrument flight rule operations

The objectives were to determine minimum autopilot functions and displays required to keep pilot workload at an acceptable level; to determine what constitutes an acceptable level of workload; to identify critical tasks; and to suggest specific experiments required to refine conclusions. It was determined that workload relief is derived from basic stability augmentation; that complex autopilots can lead to serious blunders; and that displays need to enhance positional awareness and minimize the likelihood of false hypothesis.

Hoh, R.↗
NASA NTRS1984

Ground-simulation investigation of VTOL instrument flight rules airworthiness criteria

A two-part ground-simulation investigation of VTOL terminal-area operations, conducted as part of a joint NASA/FAA program to develop airworthiness criteria for this class of vehicle, is described. The baseline vehicle selected for the simulations was a generalized version of the XV-15 tilt-rotor mathematical model, which was modified to permit generic variations in forces or moments or both with power or configuration changes. Additionally, changes to wing area and rotor-blade chord were considered as a means of modifying the allowable thrust-angle versus speed relationships (the conversion corridor). The Vertical Motion Simulator at Ames Research Center was used in the experiment. Four engineering test pilots conducted over 200 piloted evaluations examining the influence of the experimental variables on their ability to perform terminal-area operations.

Lebacqz, J. V.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Analysis of general aviation accidents during operations under instrument flight rules

A report is presented to describe some of the errors that pilots make during flight under IFR. The data indicate that there is less risk during the approach and landing phase of IFR flights, as compared to VFR operations. Single-pilot IFR accident rates continue to be higher than two-pilot IFR incident rates, reflecting the high work load of IFR operations.

Bennett, C. T.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Analysis and Prediction of VFR Vs IFR Traffic Behavior to Support Uncrewed Aircraft Flight Operations at Regional Airports

Uncrewed Aircraft flight operations at a regional airport will be affected by the uncertainty in the Visual Flight Rules traffic around. This paper analyzes Visual Flight Rules traffic behavior, compares it with Instrument Flight Rules traffic and develops traffic prediction methods to support uncrewed aircraft flight operations. The spatio-temporal distribution of traffic operating under Visual Flight Rules and Instrument Flight Rules was analyzed from one month of historical track data around Fort Worth Alliance airport as a representative regional airport. The traffic behavior was visualized as occupancy maps generated at different altitudes. The Instrument Flight Rules traffic was concentrated in fewer regions of the airspace along structured routes where the risk of interacting with one or more flights reached close to fifty percent in some areas. Visual Flight Rules traffic was spread over more regions, mostly segregated from the Instrument Flight Rules regions, and the risk of interaction was lower reaching up to twenty-five percent on average over the month in some regions. The interaction risk was predicted using predictive occupancy maps over multiple time horizons and conditioned on time and partial observation of traffic in the vicinity. The month-to-month predictability of Visual Flight Rules risk was lower than that of the Instrument Flight Rules traffic, consistently over all the conditions analyzed. However, the prediction and its accuracy were demonstrated to be sensitive to the conditions used. The predictive models generated can be used to support both strategic planning and in-flight decision-making by uncrewed aircraft during flight operations while maintaining an acceptable risk of interacting with other traffic.

VFR↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Analysis and Prediction of VFR Vs IFR Traffic Behavior to Support Uncrewed Aircraft Flight Operations at Regional Airports

Uncrewed Aircraft flight operations at a regional airport will be affected by the uncertainty in the Visual Flight Rules traffic around. This paper analyzes Visual Flight Rules traffic behavior, compares it with Instrument Flight Rules traffic and develops traffic prediction methods to support uncrewed aircraft flight operations. The spatio-temporal distribution of traffic operating under Visual Flight Rules and Instrument Flight Rules was analyzed from one month of historical track data around Fort Worth Alliance airport as a representative regional airport. The traffic behavior was visualized as occupancy maps generated at different altitudes. The Instrument Flight Rules traffic was concentrated in fewer regions of the airspace along structured routes where the risk of interacting with one or more flights reached close to fifty percent in some areas. Visual Flight Rules traffic was spread over more regions, mostly segregated from the Instrument Flight Rules regions, and the risk of interaction was lower reaching up to twenty-five percent on average over the month in some regions. The interaction risk was predicted using predictive occupancy maps over multiple time horizons and conditioned on time and partial observation of traffic in the vicinity. The month-to-month predictability of Visual Flight Rules risk was lower than that of the Instrument Flight Rules traffic, consistently over all the conditions analyzed. However, the prediction and its accuracy were demonstrated to be sensitive to the conditions used. The predictive models generated can be used to support both strategic planning and in-flight decision-making by uncrewed aircraft during flight operations while maintaining an acceptable risk of interacting with other traffic.

VFR↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Introduction to Air Traffic Management

The presentation introduces students and faculty to air traffic management with focus on air traffic data for data-science. Starting with the common attributes of transportation systems — highway transportation, air transportation and data transportation, the initial set of slides discuss the purpose of data-science in air traffic management, reasons why air traffic management is challenging, and the multidisciplinary nature of air traffic management research. The history of flight from 1903 — Wright Flyer — to 1987 — formation of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association — is briefly discussed. The national airspace system is described in terms of airports in the U. S., air traffic control facilities (flight service stations, terminal, enroute and system command center), airspace geometry (sectors, airways and navaids), governing regulations and directives, airspace classification (Class A through G), special use airspace, visual flight rules and instrument flight rules. The contents of a flight-plan are described. Weather briefing is discussed. The surveillance equipment used for surface, terminal area and enroute are described, and the aircraft states obtained using the surveillance data are listed. Airline operations control functions — schedule development, flight planning, resource scheduling and flight following — are noted. Next, the roles and responsibilities of air traffic controllers and traffic flow managers are discussed. Separation standards and conflict resolution techniques are outlined. Finally, traffic flow management techniques are reviewed with an illustrative example.

Air Traffic Management↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Introduction to Air Traffic Management

The presentation introduces students and faculty to air traffic management with focus on air traffic data for data-science. Starting with the common attributes of transportation systems — highway transportation, air transportation and data transportation, the initial set of slides discuss the purpose of data-science in air traffic management, reasons why air traffic management is challenging, and the multidisciplinary nature of air traffic management research. The history of flight from 1903 — Wright Flyer — to 1987 — formation of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association — is briefly discussed. The national airspace system is described in terms of airports in the U. S., air traffic control facilities (flight service stations, terminal, enroute and system command center), airspace geometry (sectors, airways and navaids), governing regulations and directives, airspace classification (Class A through G), special use airspace, visual flight rules and instrument flight rules. The contents of a flight-plan are described. Weather briefing is discussed. The surveillance equipment used for surface, terminal area and enroute are described, and the aircraft states obtained using the surveillance data are listed. Airline operations control functions — schedule development, flight planning, resource scheduling and flight following — are noted. Next, the roles and responsibilities of air traffic controllers and traffic flow managers are discussed. Separation standards and conflict resolution techniques are outlined. Finally, traffic flow management techniques are reviewed with an illustrative example.

Air Traffic Management↗
NASA NTRS2020

New Flight Rules to Enable the Era of Aerial Mobility in the National Airspace System

In the 21st Century, new aviation markets, vehicle types, and technologies are fast emerging, inspiring new operational concepts for the National Airspace System such as Unmanned Aircraft Systems Traffic Management and Urban Air Mobility. These novel operations envision a dramatic increase in aerial mobility, or the ability to navigate freely through the airspace with unprecedented access and operational flexibility. Implementing these concepts presents a major challenge to the existing operational modes of Visual Flight Rules (VFR) and Instrument Flight Rules (IFR), developed under the limitations of early 20th Century technology and procedures to ensure safe navigation and separation from traffic. To meet this challenge and to support the needs of operators in the 21st Century and beyond, this paper proposes that VFR and IFR be augmented by new flight rules – Digital Flight Rules (DFR) – that leverage modern and emerging technologies and are not bound by restrictions borne of the state of technology 75-100 years ago. The objective of DFR is to provide safe and unfettered access to the airspace to all participating vehicle operators under all visibility conditions without incurring the limitations in operational flexibility inherent to IFR and even VFR. Advancements in communications, navigation, surveillance, aircraft connectivity, information access, automation technology, and supporting ground infrastructure provide the opportunity for the vehicle operator to engage at an unprecedented level in managing their flights regardless of flight visibility. Under DFR, these advancements enable the vehicle operator to assume full responsibility for traffic separation and therefore full trajectory management authority in all visibility conditions and airspace regions. The changes in roles and responsibilities are expected to enable greater airspace access and operational flexibility than afforded by IFR and VFR, thus enabling the emergence of new operations and a new era of advanced aerial mobility.

Mobility↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Digital Flight: Enabling the Era of Scalable Mobility in the National Airspace System

In the 21st Century, new aviation markets, vehicle types, and technologies are fast emerging, inspiring new operational concepts for the National Airspace System such as Unmanned Aircraft Systems Traffic Management and Urban Air Mobility. These novel operations envision a dramatic increase in aerial mobility, or the ability to navigate freely through the airspace with unprecedented access and operational flexibility. Implementing these concepts presents a major challenge to the existing operational modes of Visual Flight Rules (VFR) and Instrument Flight Rules (IFR), developed under the limitations of early 20th Century technology and procedures to ensure safe navigation and separation from traffic. To meet this challenge and to support the needs of operators in the 21st Century and beyond, this paper proposes that VFR and IFR be augmented by new flight rules – Digital Flight Rules (DFR) – that leverage modern and emerging technologies and are not bound by restrictions borne of the state of technology 75-100 years ago. The objective of DFR is to provide safe and unfettered access to the airspace to all participating vehicle operators under all visibility conditions without incurring the limitations in operational flexibility inherent to IFR and even VFR. Advancements in communications, navigation, surveillance, aircraft connectivity, information access, automation technology, and supporting ground infrastructure provide the opportunity for the vehicle operator to engage at an unprecedented level in managing their flights regardless of flight visibility. Under DFR, these advancements enable the vehicle operator to assume full responsibility for traffic separation and therefore full trajectory management authority in all visibility conditions and airspace regions. The changes in roles and responsibilities are expected to enable greater airspace access and operational flexibility than afforded by IFR and VFR, thus enabling the emergence of new operations and a new era of advanced aerial mobility.

Mobility↗
NASA NTRS2022

Applicability of Digital Flight to the Operations of Self-Piloted Unmanned Aircraft Systems in the National Airspace System

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) hold great promise for a new era of specialized missions, including personal air transportation, cargo flight operations, aerial surveys, inspections, firefighting and more. The anticipated market growth is significant. To unlock its scalability and incumbent benefits requires a human to oversee multiple flights simultaneously, focusing on multi-vehicle mission management and relinquishing to autonomous systems their active role in controlling the aircrafts’ flight paths. Key to the realization of these scalability benefits is minimally-encumbered access to the National Airspace System (NAS), which poses some unique challenges for self-piloted UAS aircraft operations. These include the requirement for compatibility with existing airspace structures and operations including Visual Flight Rules (VFR) and Instrument Flight Rules (IFR), neither of which were developed to accommodate the unique needs and capabilities of UAS. This paper explores the applicability of Digital Flight to the operations of self-piloted UAS. As proposed by NASA, Digital Flight is a flight operations capability, enabled by a set of cooperative procedures and digital technologies, in which flight operators ensure flight-path safety through automated separation and flight path management in lieu of visual procedures and Air Traffic Control separation services. Flights operating under potentially-forthcoming rules of Digital Flight employ advanced automation technologies, information sharing, connectivity to operational data, and cooperative behaviors through distributed decision-making to maintain safety and achieve mission objectives. Designed for integration with VFR and IFR operations in shared NAS airspace, potentially as a third set of flight rules, Digital Flight may provide the mechanism for UAS operators – and all aircraft operators – to scale and diversify their operations beyond what is achievable under current regulations.

DFR↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Initial Analysis of Digitally Enabled Cooperative Operations in Class D Terminal Airspace

The primary contribution of this paper is an initial analysis of integrating digitally enabled cooperative operations (or digital operations for short) with Visual Flight Rules (VFR) and Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations in the terminal airspace around a Class D airport, specifically around Fort Worth Alliance airport (KAFW). Enabled by connected digital technologies and automated information exchange, digital operations as envisioned would utilize cooperative practices and operator-responsible separation to ensure safety. In the present study, three conflict management configurations for digital operations were analyzed: 1) centralized with a single instance of a conflict management service to model a scenario with only one fleet operator conducting digital operations or all fleet operators utilizing the same service, 2) federated with two different instances to model a scenario with two different fleet operators conducting digital operations, and 3) fully distributed with a different instance for each digital operation. In simulations in which recorded tracks for VFR and IFR operations were played back and digital operations were modeled that would nominally arrive at KAFW once every 20 minutes (given no conflict resolution maneuvers), there were one or fewer losses of separation (LOS) across the three conflict management configurations. The same result was seen in simulations in which digital operations would nominally arrive at KAFW once every 10 minutes. However, in simulations in which digital operations would nominally arrive at KAFW once every 5 minutes, the number of LOS ranged between six and ten. This highlights the need for follow-on research to investigate the extent to which additional capabilities for digital operations, such as complexity management and/or flow organization, may be needed.

digitally enabled cooperative operations, digital ↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Initial Analysis of Digitally Enabled Cooperative Operations in Class D Terminal Airspace

The primary contribution of this paper is an initial analysis of integrating digitally enabled cooperative operations (or digital operations for short) with Visual Flight Rules (VFR) and Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations in the terminal airspace around a Class D airport, specifically around Fort Worth Alliance airport (KAFW). Enabled by connected digital technologies and automated information exchange, digital operations as envisioned would utilize cooperative practices and operator-responsible separation to ensure safety. In the present study, three conflict management configurations for digital operations were analyzed: 1) centralized with a single instance of a conflict management service to model a scenario with only one fleet operator conducting digital operations or all fleet operators utilizing the same service, 2) federated with two different instances to model a scenario with two different fleet operators conducting digital operations, and 3) fully distributed with a different instance for each digital operation. In simulations in which recorded tracks for VFR and IFR operations were played back and digital operations were modeled that would nominally arrive at KAFW once every 20 minutes (given no conflict resolution maneuvers), there were one or fewer losses of separation (LOS) across the three conflict management configurations. The same result was seen in simulations in which digital operations would nominally arrive at KAFW once every 10 minutes. However, in simulations in which digital operations would nominally arrive at KAFW once every 5 minutes, the number of LOS ranged between six and ten. This highlights the need for follow-on research to investigate the extent to which additional capabilities for digital operations, such as complexity management and/or flow organization, may be needed.

digitally enabled cooperative operations↗
NASA NTRS2012

The Effects of Limited Intent Information Availability on Self-Separation in Mixed Operations

This paper presents the results of a computer simulation of the NASA Autonomous Flight Rules (AFR) concept for airborne self-separation in airspace shared with conventional Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) traffic. This study was designed to determine the impact of varying levels of intent information from IFR aircraft on the performance of AFR conflict detection and resolution. The study used Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) to supply IFR intent, but other methods such as an uplink from a ground-based System Wide Information Management (SWIM) network could alternatively supply this information. The independent variables of the study consist of the number of ADS-B trajectory change reports broadcast by IFR aircraft and the time interval between those reports. The conflict detection and resolution metrics include: the number of conflicts and losses of separation, the average conflict warning time, and the amount of time spent in strategic vs. tactical flight modes (i.e., whether the autoflight system was decoupled from the planned route in the Flight Management System in order to respond to a short-notice traffic conflict). The results show a measurable benefit of broadcasting IFR intent vs. relying on state-only broadcasts. The results of this study will inform ongoing separation assurance research and FAA NextGen design decisions for the sharing of trajectory intent information in the National Airspace System.

Lewis, Timothy A.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Advanced Weather Awareness and Reporting Enhancements

AWARE (Aviation Weather Awareness and Reporting Enhancements) was a NASA Cooperative Research and Development program conducted jointly by Rockwell Scientific, Rockwell Collins, and NASA. The effort culminated in an enhanced weather briefing and reporting tool prototype designed to integrate graphical and text-based aviation weather data to provide clear situational awareness in the context of a specific pilot, flight and equipment profile. The initial implementation of AWARE was as a web-based preflight planning tool, specifically for general aviation pilots, who do not have access to support such as the dispatchers available for commercial airlines. Initial usability tests showed that for VFR (Visual Flight Rules) pilots, AWARE provided faster and more effective weather evaluation. In a subsequent formal usability test for IFR (Instrument Flight Rules) pilots, all users finished the AWARE tests faster than the parallel DUAT tests, and all subjects graded AWARE higher for effectiveness, efficiency, and usability. The decision analysis basis of AWARE differentiates it from other aviation safety programs, providing analysis of context-sensitive data in a personalized graphical format to aid pilots/dispatchers in their complex flight requirements.

Busquets, Anthony M.↗
NASA NTRS2014

ACES Study of DAA-Mitigated UAS Operations SC-228 Requirements Sub Group

Realization of the expected proliferation of Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) operations in the National Airspace System (NAS) depends on the development and validation of performance standards for UAS Detect and Avoid (DAA) Systems. The RTCA Special Committee 228 is charged with leading the development of draft Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) for UAS DAA Systems. NASA, as a participating member of RTCA SC-228 is committed to supporting the development and validation of draft requirements as well as the safety substantiation and end-to-end assessment of DAA system performance. A recent study conducted using NASA's ACES (Airspace Concept Evaluation System) simulation capability begins to address questions surrounding the development of draft MOPS for DAA systems by assessing DAA performance in a NAS-wide context. ACES analyses were conducted to determine the impact of varying elements of UAS pilot performance and uncertainty mitigations on DAA system performance. Simulations were conducted with recorded cooperative and non-cooperative VFR (Visual Flight Rules) traffic to accurately model UAS encounters with other NAS traffic (ATC (Air Traffic Control) being responsible for separation with other IFR (Instrument Flight Rules) aircraft) and with roughly 25, 000 simulated UAS operations The number of Loss of Well Clear (LoWC) events were recorded across the range of independent variables: pilot response time, horizontal LoWC prediction buffer and horizontal LoWC resolution buffer. The number of LoWC events was compared to the unmitigated case (without the benefit of a DAA system) to determine the resultant risk-ratio for each of 8 simulation conditions. The parameter trades presented by the resultant DAA system performance (risk ratio) will be used by SC 228 to inform decisions about future requirements development and validation efforts.

Detect-and-Avoid↗
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.↗