SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
UAS are growing quickly and the promise of economic growth is large and real. However, for many domains to realize this potential, multi-vehicle control by a single operator (or m:N) is required. NASA has stood up an industry/gov't working group to identify issues and barriers. This work will be reviewed.
To achieve the vision of Advanced Air Mobility (AAM), a transition from localized operations of aircraft to remote operations is being pursued across many use cases. This transition will allow fewer human operators to manage more increasingly autonomous aircraft (i.e., m operators managing N vehicles, or m:N). To study this operational concept, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Langley Research Center (LaRC) has developed a prototype remote vehicle operations center and ground control station (GCS) software to conduct research with simulated and real flight operations. To date, flight operations at LaRC have been limited to one vehicle per operator. However, the current paper describes initial development and considerations for enabling m:N flight operations at LaRC. Further, the research described in this paper provides the foundation for a concept of operations (ConOps) that will be developed to support remote operators managing multiple increasingly autonomous vehicles, with the goal of exploring human-autonomy teaming (HAT) concepts that enable more advanced m:N operations. Two key enablers have been identified to facilitate successful m:N operations: GCS software updates for multi-vehicle management and procedural updates for vehicle handoffs during off-nominal events. Additionally, specific modifications were identified across five key areas: technology and software, team structure, inter-team communication, contingency plans, and operator decision flows. Next steps in forming the LaRC m:N ConOps will include working with subject-matter experts to identify off-nominal scenarios, implementing the recommended GCS functionality for m:N operations, and performing integration testing of facility capabilities and new operational procedures. Although the future m:N ConOps will be tailored to the NASA LaRC remote operations facility and flight range, it is intended to be a transparent, accessible, and reality-based exemplar for external organizations seeking to create or evaluate their own m:N operational concepts.
In this presentation, current approaches to enable multiple-operator, multiple vehicle (M:N) operations are reviewed together with recent collaborative efforts between NASA and Uber. Topics include a review of human-automation teaming (HAT) concepts, including plays and working agreements, and a particular task-allocation method called Automation Level-based Task Allocation (ALTA). Following introductory material on HAT, an overview of a recent (July 2020) cognitive walkthrough study of M:N operations in the context of a food delivery via small-Unmanned Aircraft Systems application is provided. Initial results from this cognitive walkthrough detailing operator feedback on displays, operator and supervisor roles and responsibilities, and the overall concept of operation are reviewed. The presentation concludes with a description of a future, human-in-the-loop simulation experiment of M:N operations in a high-fidelity environment, which will examine the effects of high workload and assistive automation/tools on operator performance.
In recent years, attention and interest by industry and researchers has grown in a control paradigm for remotely piloted aircraft termed “m:N operations.” In an m:N operation, a team of m remote pilots in command (RIPCs) collaboratively manage the flights of N aircraft. A consequence of an m:N concept of operations is that the RPICs will have to switch attention from one aircraft to another and from one task to another. Previous research in m:N operations has focused on the workload experienced by an RPIC and their level of situation awareness on their flights. Researchers have found that RPIC workload and situation awareness are generally sensitive to increasing N, although NASA’s Multi-Vehicle (m:N) Working Group has suggested that the driver of workload/situation awareness is the number of exceptions requiring human intervention as opposed to the value of N itself. In any case, a natural antecedent of workload is task load. In this paper, queueing theory is applied to a 1:N Urban Air Mobility (UAM) air taxi operation in order to estimate pilot task load for managing radio communications with air traffic controllers (ATCs) under increasing N. An M/M/1 queueing system is used to model the RIPC’s servicing of calls and clearance requests (e.g., departure, arrival, or airspace transition) to ATC for the N aircraft. Important parameters for the queueing model are the task arrival rate and the average service time for task completion. Radio communication times from past human-in-the-loop simulation studies are used to measure service times for a 1:4 and 1:12 UAM operation and to interpolate service times for 4 < N < 12. A Monte Carlo method is then employed, using the measured and interpolated service times, to estimate arrival rate and related queueing statistics. The paper concludes by considering the estimated queuing statistics, particularly the RPIC’s utilization (i.e., proportion of time actively servicing tasks), the length of the task queue over time, and the implications for task-balanced system design.
The Advanced Air Mobility movement is occurring across the world with goals of enabling, affordable, efficient, accessible, and safe air transportation at a much larger scale than today’s operations, largely enabled by electrification and automation. Transformative and disruptive innovations are emerging that will support an ecosystem designed to transport goods and people to locations not traditionally served by air transportation. To realize the full vision of AAM, technology will be needed to allow a few operators to operate many vehicles (m:N). The benefits of m:N operations are described, along with the current state-of-the-art, barriers, need, and NASA’s plans to address some of the barriers, including a Multi-Vehicle (m:N) Working Group with goals of producing a community-developed operational approval roadmap for various domains.
Since 2019, the NASA and industry partners have been involved in research focused on a novel paradigm for operations of remotely piloted aircraft. This paradigm involves multiple people sharing a fleet of multiple vehicles between them. Referred to as m:N (pronounced “em-to-en”), this configuration describes a ratio where m is the number of operators and N is the number of vehicles. Through force and asset multiplication, the m:N concept seeks to enable a scalable and resilient operation of remotely crewed vehicles. The primary means of obtaining such a robust operation is through allowing a flexible crew of variable size to dynamically attend to the needs of assets in while performing real-time operator workload management. It is in that sense that assets are shared between operators: as needed (such as in events of elevated workload) an operator in an m:N context can “handoff” the responsibility for some amount of assets, nh < N, to be absorbed by the m – 1 crew members on staff. At some time later, these nh assets could be returned to their original owner or they may be further distributed to other crew if called for by the mission. During this panel, I will elaborate on the research activity undertaken by the Human-Autonomy Teaming (HAT) Laboratory at NASA Ames Research Center over the previous three years. The studies conducted by the HAT Lab range from interviews with subject matter experts, a cognitive walkthrough, a task analysis, and two simulation experiments to-date. During experimentation, pilots made use of an advanced Ground Control Station developed by the HAT Lab and industry partners to simulate m:N operations in two large, metropolitan areas of Southern California: Los Angeles and San Diego. Further experimentation planned over the next few years. Results from our research to-date indicates that pilots of a moderately sized fleet of about a dozen remotely crewed aircraft adequately maintained safety performance and situation awareness of their aircraft, even when presented with unexpected situations of heightened workload.
Uncrewed aerial systems (UAS) show promise in urban air transport, package delivery, and emergency services. UAS efficiency can be significantly improved by having fewer operators (m) manage a greater number of vehicles (N), or the m:N architecture of operation. The current study investigates how workload affects operators’ task-allocation decision-making and potential effects of two crucial human factors: trust and self-confidence. In the context of a simulated UAS package-delivery task, 10 participants with expertise in UAS operation were recruited. Each participant reported their preferred task-allocation strategy for a set of five subtasks while watching two sets of videos with different workload levels. Perceived workload, trust, and self-confidence were also measured after each video session. Overall, participants indicated a preference for automation for most of the subtasks under the delivery mission. Trust, rather than workload and self-confidence, played a significant role in experts’ decisions of task-allocation and assignment methods. Higher trust led to higher preference for automation.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Advanced air mobility (AAM) technologies incorporate increasingly autonomous systems that allow fully remote, independent, and intelligent operation of air vehicles to support the transportation of goods and passengers within and across urban and rural areas. With a myriad of automated technologies enabling the AAM ecosystem, the human operator’s role will likely be a passive supervisory monitor of the air vehicles, involving increasingly fewer humans (m) that manage many more autonomous systems (N), or m:N operations. Unfortunately, the human performance literature suggests that human operators will exhibit poor supervision of numerous autonomous agents due to the limits of attentional resources in the operators. In the general human information-processing model, a human operator exercises a limited pool of attentional resources to engage various information-processing stages including detecting, perceiving, comprehending, and predicting objects around them. Yamani and Horrey (2018) expanded the human information-processing model to characterize a tradeoff between information-processing demand and resource relief that automation brings in the context of automated driving. In their model, a driver interacting with an automated driving system is assumed to reallocate resources “freed” by automation to support other information-processing stages required for successful task performance. A future AAM ecosystem enabled by an orchestration of advanced automated systems, however, requires a single operator to interact with more than one air vehicle with varying levels and degrees of automated systems, making the traditional framework of human-automation interaction insufficient. To address this gap, we provide a review of the literature on situation assessment and trust, two constructs identified as critical for a fuller understanding of intimate and intricate interactions between a human operator and multiple air vehicles equipped with increasingly autonomous systems. Then, we propose an expansion of Yamani and Horrey’s (2018) model to motivate systematic research on the human operator’s role, identify factors that influence resource allocation and guide human-centered design of an interface supporting the m:N operation in the AAM environment.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
The Pathfinding for Airspace with Autonomous Vehicles (PAAV) Concept Document, version 1.0, lays out the key challenges and potential solutions for the use of uncrewed aircraft (UA) technology for future regional air cargo operations. The challenges and solutions described in this document were informed by communications with the UA industry community (e.g., RTCA, the Federal Aviation Administration, and regional air cargo business operators), as well as the PAAV team’s research activities during the last two years including four tabletop exercises, a human-in-the-loop simulation study, a numerical simulation study, a functional allocation study, and flight data analysis (Appendix A). This document first describes the expected operational context of PAAV (Section 2), such as the flight mission, baseline UAS components, nominal operations, m:N operations (i.e., "m" remote pilots per "N" aircraft), and off-nominal operations. This context sets the scope for the PAAV concept development work. PAAV concept development assumes that UA operations will be increasingly autonomous. Thus, near- and far-term assumptions are defined (Section 3). PAAV identified seven key challenges for UA operations (Section 4): - Flight route planning - Separation and flow management - Traffic pattern integration - Contingency management - Taxi, takeoff, and landing - m:N operations - Communications operations The following 13 potential solutions to these challenges are then described (Section 5): - Scalable communications architecture - Data link - Designated UAS corridors - Crew planning for m:N operations - Flight route optimization - Traffic load-level control - Trajectory solutions with data link - Automated hazard avoidance for m:N operations - Traffic pattern integration (TPI) tool - Standard lost command and control (C2) link (LC2L) procedures - Automated hazard avoidance under LC2L - Auto-taxi, auto-takeoff, and auto-land - Ground control station (GCS) user interface for m:N operations The document attempts to link each of these solutions to one or more of the challenge areas. Novel solutions involving numerous automation technologies are needed to mitigate traffic and airspace management challenges, especially for realizing m:N operations and ensuring safety under LC2L conditions. The purpose of this document is to help understand alternatives and tradeoffs among potential solutions and provide a foundation for a cohesive PAAV concept that will be described and refined in subsequent concept versions.
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.
The principles and reasons for employing Human Autonomy Teaming is discussed. Application of these techniques to multi-vehicle control is described. In several operational environments from small drone delivery to air taxi to autonomous cargo, many companies will need technologies that will allow for the operation of an unmanned aircraft (UAS or eVTOL) by a small crew of individuals that are located in a remote network operations center. That is, Multiple operators supervising an increasing Number of vehicles (M:N).This will require a new control/supervisory paradigm where the supervisors team with automation to achieve their joint tasks; Human Autonomy Teaming (HAT).This task will follow the HAT philosophy and tenants (e.g., trust, bi-directional communication, pilot directed interfaces). It will also develop and employ specific HAT tools (e.g., playbook, working agreements, predictive timeline displays, transparent interfaces to build trust). This presentation discusses the barriers and requirements for future m:N operations.
This is a status report on the m:N working group that has met three times over the last two years. They have identified barriers by domain, detect and avoid use-cases, and further analysis.
The presentation discusses the background and project framing for the m:N body of work in TTT. It also review the m:N technical challenge for Operations of Autonomous Fleets.
The principles and reasons for employing Human Autonomy Teaming is discussed. Application of these techniques to multi-vehicle control is described. In several operational environments from small drone delivery to air taxi to autonomous cargo, many companies will need technologies that will allow for the operation of an unmanned aircraft (UAS or eVTOL) by a small crew of individuals that are located in a remote network operations center. That is, Multiple operators supervising an increasing Number of vehicles (M:N). This will require a new control/supervisory paradigm where the supervisors team with automation to achieve their joint tasks; Human Autonomy Teaming (HAT). This task will follow the HAT philosophy and tenants (e.g., trust, bi-directional communication, pilot directed interfaces). It will also develop and employ specific HAT tools (e.g., playbook, working agreements, predictive timeline displays, transparent interfaces to build trust).
The last decade or so has seen growing interest in new control paradigms and concepts of operation for uncrewed aircraft systems (UAS) in which multiple aircraft are piloted remotely by a single or relatively small number of people. Referred to as “one-to-many” and “many-to- many” (alternatively, “multi-operator, multi-vehicle”)—and frequently expressed as the corresponding ratios, 1:N and m:N—such novel configurations of aircraft and the people who manage them are seen as critical to the path to future operations involving UAS. Examples of industry domains interested in these control paradigms are small package delivery services utilizing small UAS and passenger-carrying, short-range “Urban Air Mobility” (UAM) operations. Stakeholders in such operations have identified communication and coordination of flight activity with air traffic controllers (ATC) as a barrier to operations. In contrast to present-day flight operations, in which a pilot communicates with one ATC on one radio frequency for one aircraft, multi-vehicle operations potentially entail a significant increase in pilot task load for management of comms. New concepts, such as UAS Service Suppliers (USSs) and Providers of Services to UAM (PSUs), have been proposed to address the known bottleneck for Air Traffic Management (ATM) presented by multi-vehicle operations. While progress has been steadily made over years developing USSs and PSUs, it is generally expected that initial UAM operations will rely on traditional voice-over-radio communication with ATC for purposes of ATM. The current study was a human-in-the-loop simulation that had participants, each possessing a Private Pilot License, act as the ground-based pilot-in- command for multiple vehicles in a hypothetical UAM service in the San Francisco Bay Area. The experiment utilized a 2-by-3, within-subjects design in which the pilot’s Vehicle Load (4 vs. 12) and Comm System (Voice, Datalink, and a Hybrid) were manipulated. The task given to pilots was to use the Comm System to coordinate flight activity for all aircraft with appropriate controllers, having to obtain departure and arrival clearances at “vertiport” facilities and transition clearances for any intermediate airspaces along the route. Pilots were additionally responsible for compliance with vectoring instructions issued by ATC. Subjective workload questionnaires (NASA-TLX) were administered following each experimental trial. Screen recordings of the pilot’s Ground Control Station (GCS) and audio recordings of trials were subsequently coded to obtain performance metrics: response times and error rates. Presented in this paper are results related to pilot responses to vectoring instructions issued by ATC. Workload was found to be significantly higher in the 12-Vehicle condition compared to the 4-Vehicle condition, nearly maxing out the NASA-TLX overall workload scale. There was no significant difference made by the Comm System on workload ratings. Pilots’ response times to communications were fastest in the Voice condition, although overall “service time” for compliance was shorter in Datalink and Hybrid conditions in most cases. Errors by pilots were frequent in both Vehicle Load conditions, most perniciously when using the Voice system. The results of this study suggest tradeoffs in advantages and disadvantages of the three comm systems. Recommendations for communication system design are provided taking the tradeoffs into account.
The last decade or so has seen growing interest in new control paradigms and concepts of operation for uncrewed aircraft systems (UAS) in which multiple aircraft are piloted remotely by a single or relatively small number of people. Referred to as “one-to-many” and “many-to- many” (alternatively, “multi-operator, multi-vehicle”)—and frequently expressed as the corresponding ratios, 1:N and m:N—such novel configurations of aircraft and the people who manage them are seen as critical to the path to future operations involving UAS. Examples of industry domains interested in these control paradigms are small package delivery services utilizing small UAS and passenger-carrying, short-range “Urban Air Mobility” (UAM) operations. Stakeholders in such operations have identified communication and coordination of flight activity with air traffic controllers (ATC) as a barrier to operations. In contrast to present-day flight operations, in which a pilot communicates with one ATC on one radio frequency for one aircraft, multi-vehicle operations potentially entail a significant increase in pilot task load for management of comms. New concepts, such as UAS Service Suppliers (USSs) and Providers of Services to UAM (PSUs), have been proposed to address the known bottleneck for Air Traffic Management (ATM) presented by multi-vehicle operations. While progress has been steadily made over years developing USSs and PSUs, it is generally expected that initial UAM operations will rely on traditional voice-over-radio communication with ATC for purposes of ATM. The current study was a human-in-the-loop simulation that had participants, each possessing a Private Pilot License, act as the ground-based pilot-in- command for multiple vehicles in a hypothetical UAM service in the San Francisco Bay Area. The experiment utilized a 2-by-3, within-subjects design in which the pilot’s Vehicle Load (4 vs. 12) and Comm System (Voice, Datalink, and a Hybrid) were manipulated. The task given to pilots was to use the Comm System to coordinate flight activity for all aircraft with appropriate controllers, having to obtain departure and arrival clearances at “vertiport” facilities and transition clearances for any intermediate airspaces along the route. Pilots were additionally responsible for compliance with vectoring instructions issued by ATC. Subjective workload questionnaires (NASA-TLX) were administered following each experimental trial. Screen recordings of the pilot’s Ground Control Station (GCS) and audio recordings of trials were subsequently coded to obtain performance metrics: response times and error rates. Presented in this paper are results related to pilot responses to vectoring instructions issued by ATC. Workload was found to be significantly higher in the 12-Vehicle condition compared to the 4-Vehicle condition, nearly maxing out the NASA-TLX overall workload scale. There was no significant difference made by the Comm System on workload ratings. Pilots’ response times to communications were fastest in the Voice condition, although overall “service time” for compliance was shorter in Datalink and Hybrid conditions in most cases. Errors by pilots were frequent in both Vehicle Load conditions, most perniciously when using the Voice system. The results of this study suggest tradeoffs in advantages and disadvantages of the three comm systems. Recommendations for communication system design are provided taking the tradeoffs into account.