Manned Versus Unmanned Risk and Complexity Considerations for Future Midsized X-Planes
The objective of this work was to identify and estimate complexity and risks associated with the development and testing of new low-cost medium-scale X-plane aircraft primarily focused on air transport operations. Piloting modes that were evaluated for this task were manned, remotely piloted, and unmanned flight research programs. This analysis was conducted early in the data collection period for X-plane concept vehicles before preliminary designs were complete. Over 50 different aircraft and system topics were used to evaluate the three piloting control modes. Expert group evaluations from a diverse set of pilots, engineers, and other experts at Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate centers within the National Aeronautics and Space Administration provided qualitative reasoning on the many issues surrounding the decisions regarding piloting modes. The group evaluations were numerically rated to evaluate each topic quantitatively and were used to provide independent criteria for vehicle complexity and risk. An Edwards Air Force Base instruction document was identified that emerged as a source of the effects found in our qualitative and quantitative data. The study showed that a manned aircraft was the best choice to align with test activities for transport aircraft flight research from a low-complexity and low-risk perspective. The study concluded that a manned aircraft option would minimize the risk and complexity to improve flight-test efficiency and bound the cost of the flight-test portion of the program. Several key findings and discriminators between the three modes are discussed in detail.