Results for “GCS” — Page 2

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Eye Glance Behaviors of Ground Control Station Operators in a Simulated Urban Air Mobility Environment

Research into concepts such as advanced air mobility (AAM) and urban air mobility (UAM) offers an opportunity for successfully and safely adding new classes of vehicles into the National Airspace System. However, a need exists for research into the human factors associated with these concepts. In this paper, we evaluate the gaze behaviors of three remote ground control station operators (GCSOs) conducting simulated UAM operations. The participants monitored and controlled an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) from pre-flight to landing using ground control station (GCS) software across nine scenarios within a remote UAS operations center at NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC). As this work was exploratory, descriptive statistics were calculated to provide some initial insight into GCSO gaze patterns associated with the GCS display. Scenarios that required the operator to directly interact with an airspace scheduling system off-screen resulted in fewer on-screen glances than scenarios that did not include direct interactions with the off-screen system. After investigating several areas of interest (AOIs) within the GCS display, participants primarily viewed three AOIs: the map, vehicle status, and operations checklist. The results yielded several GCS design and operational improvement recommendations to include: (a) adding altitude information to the vehicle icon, (b) adding additional traffic information, and (c) including additional GCS training, to reduce the need to scan an operations checklist, which would allow allocation of visual attention towards other AOIs.

Urban Air Mobility↗

NASA NTRS2022

Quantifying Errors in 3D CME Parameters Derived from Synthetic Data Using White-Light Reconstruction Techniques

Current efforts in space weather forecasting of CMEs have been focused on predicting their arrival time and magnetic structure. To make these predictions, methods have been developed to derive the true CME speed, size, position, and mass, among others. Difficulties in determining the input parameters for CME forecasting models arise from the lack of direct measurements of the coronal magnetic fields and uncertainties in estimating the CME 3D geometric and kinematic parameters after eruption. White-light coronagraph images are usually employed by a variety of CME reconstruction techniques that assume more or less complex geometries. This is the first study from our International Space Science Institute (ISSI) team “Understanding Our Capabilities in Observing and Modeling Coronal Mass Ejections”, in which we explore how subjectivity affects the 3D CME parameters that are obtained from the Graduated Cylindrical Shell (GCS) reconstruction technique, which is widely used in CME research. To be able to quantify such uncertainties, the “true” values that are being fitted should be known, which are impossible to derive from observational data. We have designed two different synthetic scenarios where the “true” geometric parameters are known in order to quantify such uncertainties for the first time. We explore this by using two sets of synthetic data: 1) Using the ray-tracing option from the GCS model software itself, and 2) Using 3D magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) simulation data from the Magnetohydrodynamic Algorithm outside a Sphere code. Our experiment includes different viewing configurations using single and multiple viewpoints. CME reconstructions using a single viewpoint had the largest errors and error ranges overall for both synthetic GCS and simulated MHD white-light data. As the number of viewpoints increased from one to two, the errors decreased by approximately 4° in latitude, 22° in longitude, 14° in tilt, and 10° in half-angle. Our results quantitatively show the critical need for at least two viewpoints to be able to reduce the uncertainty in deriving CME parameters. We did not find a significant decrease in errors when going from two to three viewpoints for our specific hypothetical three spacecraft scenario using synthetic GCS white-light data. As we expected, considering all configurations and numbers of viewpoints, the mean absolute errors in the measured CME parameters are generally significantly higher in the case of the simulated MHD white-light data compared to those from the synthetic white-light images generated by the GCS model. We found the following CME parameter error bars as a starting point for quantifying the minimum error in CME parameters from white-light reconstructions: Δθ (latitude)=6° +2° -3° , Δϕ (longitude)=11° +18° -6° , Δγ (tilt)=25° +8° -7° , Δx (half-angle)=10° +12° -6° , Δh (height)=0.6 +1.2 -0.4 R ⨀ , and Δκ (ratio)=0.1 +0.03 -0.02 .

Coronal mass ejections↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Dynamic Assurance of Autonomous Systems through Ground Control Software

Assurance cases are being increasingly acknowledged as a way to build trust in complex systems with autonomous capabilities [1]. An assurance case is a comprehensive, defensible, and valid justification that a system will function as intended for the specific mission and operating environment. Such justifications for systems with autonomous capabilities are often based on various probabilistic quantifications [2]. Due to the dynamic nature of the environmental conditions in which these systems operate, as well as the changing nature of the autonomous systems themselves, these probabilistic quantifications cannot be simply estimated once during design time. Rather, they need to be continually evaluated during systems operations to ensure that the assurance case justifications are valid. We refer to the assurance case that combines both the static and dynamic elements as a Dynamic Assurance Case (DAC). Such complex systems with autonomous capabilities are often deployed with a Ground Control Software (GCS) component to enable remote operation. Whether the system is composed of a single unit or a fleet of units, deployed distributed or in remote environments, GCS acts as a window into the behavior of the deployed system. It receives telemetry from the system, issues commands to the system and provides various functionalities to visualize the system performance. We propose a dynamic assurance framework where the GCS acts as a relay between the autonomous system and its DAC. GCS can be used to measure both unit-specific as well as system-wide probabilistic quantifications using the incoming telemetry. We embed these quantifications throughout the DAC as variables that can be updated by external sources. We use the GCS to periodically update these variables, which allows us to continually evaluate the formally defined assurance case justifications. We demonstrate our dynamic assurance framework in the NASA Ames project Troupe1 that aims at developing a fleet of rovers capable of au- tonomously mapping their environment. The rovers work cooperatively, each collecting data for different parts of the environment. Each rover runs an identical core Flight System (cFS) [4] application. Troupe1 uses OpenC3 Cosmos [5] as the ground system, and AdvoCATE [3] to capture the system DAC. We show how we can measure both rover-specific and system-wide quantifications in Cosmos using its Ruby scripting editor and pass them into the DAC modelled in AdvoCATE. Then, we show how these incoming variables can be embedded in different parts of the DAC and how effects of their updates can be observed

Irfan Sljivo↗

NASA NTRS2022

Quantifying Errors in 3D CME Parameters Derived From Synthetic Data Using White-Light Reconstruction Techniques

Current efforts in space weather forecasting of CMEs have been focused on predicting their arrival time and magnetic structure. To make these predictions, methods have been developed to derive the true CME speed, size, position, and mass, among others. Difficulties in determining the input parameters for CME forecasting models arise from the lack of direct measurements of the coronal magnetic fields and uncertainties in estimating the CME 3D geometric and kinematic parameters after eruption. White-light coronagraph images are usually employed by a variety of CME reconstruction techniques that assume more or less complex geometries. This is the first study from our International Space Science Institute (ISSI) team “Understanding Our Capabilities in Observing and Modeling Coronal Mass Ejections”, in which we explore how subjectivity affects the 3D CME parameters that are obtained from the Graduated Cylindrical Shell (GCS) reconstruction technique, which is widely used in CME research. To be able to quantify such uncertainties, the “true” values that are being fitted should be known, which are impossible to derive from observational data. We have designed two different synthetic scenarios where the “true” geometric parameters are known in order to quantify such uncertainties for the first time. We explore this by using two sets of synthetic data: 1) Using the ray-tracing option from the GCS model software itself, and 2) Using 3D magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) simulation data from the Magnetohydrodynamic Algorithm outside a Sphere code. Our experiment includes different viewing configurations using single and multiple viewpoints. CME reconstructions using a single viewpoint had the largest errors and error ranges overall for both synthetic GCS and simulated MHD white-light data. As the number of viewpoints increased from one to two, the errors decreased by approximately 4° in latitude, 22° in longitude, 14° in tilt, and 10° in half-angle. Our results quantitatively show the critical need for at least two viewpoints to be able to reduce the uncertainty in deriving CME parameters. We did not find a significant decrease in errors when going from two to three viewpoints for our specific hypothetical three spacecraft scenario using synthetic GCS white-light data. As we expected, considering all configurations and numbers of viewpoints, the mean absolute errors in the measured CME parameters are generally significantly higher in the case of the simulated MHD white-light data compared to those from the synthetic white-light images generated by the GCS model. We found the following CME parameter error bars as a starting point for quantifying the minimum error in CME parameters from white-light reconstructions: Δθ (latitude)=6° +2° -3° , Δϕ (longitude)=11° +18° -6° , Δγ (tilt)=25° +8° -7° , Δx (half-angle)=10° +12° -6° , Δh (height)=0.6 +1.2 -0.4 R ⨀ , and Δκ (ratio)=0.1 +0.03 -0.02 .

Coronal mass ejections↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human-Autonomy Teaming Assistant to Support Small Uncrewed Aircraft Systems for Wildland Firefighting Operations

An exploratory human-in-the-loop simulation was conducted to investigate and characterize a Human-Autonomy Teaming (HAT) Assistant to support a remote operator of multiple small Uncrewed Aircraft Systems (sUAS) using a ground control station (GCS) in the context of a wildland fire surveillance mission. Operator performance using the GCS with the HAT Assistant (Assisted Mode) was compared to operator performance using the GCS without the HAT Assistant (Unassisted Mode) during two types of contingency-event scenarios (Low and High Complexity). In the Assisted Mode, the HAT Assistant provided updates to the level of risk to the mission along with recommendations for risk mitigation, which were not provided in the Unassisted Mode. No significant differences in objective performance and subjective ratings of workload, situation awareness, and trust in automation between the Assisted and Unassisted Modes were detected, however there were indications that participants preferred the Assisted GCS over the Unassisted GCS and directions for further development were explored. Additional work is necessary to further refine the HAT Assistant and better characterize its effects on remote operator performance while managing multiple sUAS assets. Future work is recommended to optimize the implementation of an assistant to support operator performance during different missions and across vehicle classes.

Human-Autonomy Teaming↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human-Autonomy Teaming Assistant to Support Small Uncrewed Aircraft Systems for Wildland Firefighting Operations

An exploratory human-in-the-loop simulation was conducted to investigate and characterize a Human-Autonomy Teaming (HAT) Assistant to support a remote operator of multiple small Uncrewed Aircraft Systems (sUAS) using a ground control station (GCS) in the context of a wildland fire surveillance mission. Operator performance using the GCS with the HAT Assistant (Assisted Mode) was compared to operator performance using the GCS without the HAT Assistant (Unassisted Mode) during two types of contingency-event scenarios (Low and High Complexity). In the Assisted Mode, the HAT Assistant provided updates to the level of risk to the mission along with recommendations for risk mitigation, which were not provided in the Unassisted Mode. No significant differences in objective performance and subjective ratings of workload, situation awareness, and trust in automation between the Assisted and Unassisted Modes were detected, however there were indications that participants preferred the Assisted GCS over the Unassisted GCS and directions for further development were explored. Additional work is necessary to further refine the HAT Assistant and better characterize its effects on remote operator performance while managing multiple sUAS assets. Future work is recommended to optimize the implementation of an assistant to support operator performance during different missions and across vehicle classes

Human-Autonomy Teaming↗

NASA NTRS2008

Instrument Display Visual Angles for Conventional Aircraft and the MQ-9 Ground Control Station

Aircraft instrument panels should be designed such that primary displays are in optimal viewing location to minimize pilot perception and response time. Human Factors engineers define three zones (i.e. "cones") of visual location: 1) "Easy Eye Movement" (foveal vision); 2) "Maximum Eye Movement" (peripheral vision with saccades), and 3) "Head Movement" (head movement required). Instrument display visual angles were measured to determine how well conventional aircraft (T-34, T-38, F- 15B, F-16XL, F/A-18A, U-2D, ER-2, King Air, G-III, B-52H, DC-10, B747-SCA) and the MQ-9 ground control station (GCS) complied with these standards, and how they compared with each other. Methods: Selected instrument parameters included: attitude, pitch, bank, power, airspeed, altitude, vertical speed, heading, turn rate, slip/skid, AOA, flight path, latitude, longitude, course, bearing, range and time. Vertical and horizontal visual angles for each component were measured from the pilot s eye position in each system. Results: The vertical visual angles of displays in conventional aircraft lay within the cone of "Easy Eye Movement" for all but three of the parameters measured, and almost all of the horizontal visual angles fell within this range. All conventional vertical and horizontal visual angles lay within the cone of "Maximum Eye Movement". However, most instrument vertical visual angles of the MQ-9 GCS lay outside the cone of "Easy Eye Movement", though all were within the cone of "Maximum Eye Movement". All the horizontal visual angles for the MQ-9 GCS were within the cone of "Easy Eye Movement". Discussion: Most instrument displays in conventional aircraft lay within the cone of "Easy Eye Movement", though mission-critical instruments sometimes displaced less important instruments outside this area. Many of the MQ-9 GCS systems lay outside this area. Specific training for MQ-9 pilots may be needed to avoid increased response time and potential error during flight.

Bendrick, Gregg A.↗

NASA NTRS2008

Instrument Display Visual Angles for Conventional Aircraft and the MQ-9 Ground Control Station

Aircraft instrument panels should be designed such that primary displays are in optimal viewing location to minimize pilot perception and response time. Human Factors engineers define three zones (i.e. cones ) of visual location: 1) "Easy Eye Movement" (foveal vision); 2) "Maximum Eye Movement" (peripheral vision with saccades), and 3) "Head Movement (head movement required). Instrument display visual angles were measured to determine how well conventional aircraft (T-34, T-38, F- 15B, F-16XL, F/A-18A, U-2D, ER-2, King Air, G-III, B-52H, DC-10, B747-SCA) and the MQ-9 ground control station (GCS) complied with these standards, and how they compared with each other. Selected instrument parameters included: attitude, pitch, bank, power, airspeed, altitude, vertical speed, heading, turn rate, slip/skid, AOA, flight path, latitude, longitude, course, bearing, range and time. Vertical and horizontal visual angles for each component were measured from the pilot s eye position in each system. The vertical visual angles of displays in conventional aircraft lay within the cone of "Easy Eye Movement" for all but three of the parameters measured, and almost all of the horizontal visual angles fell within this range. All conventional vertical and horizontal visual angles lay within the cone of Maximum Eye Movement. However, most instrument vertical visual angles of the MQ-9 GCS lay outside the cone of Easy Eye Movement, though all were within the cone of Maximum Eye Movement. All the horizontal visual angles for the MQ-9 GCS were within the cone of "Easy Eye Movement". Most instrument displays in conventional aircraft lay within the cone of Easy Eye Movement, though mission-critical instruments sometimes displaced less important instruments outside this area. Many of the MQ-9 GCS systems lay outside this area. Specific training for MQ-9 pilots may be needed to avoid increased response time and potential error during flight. The learning objectives include: 1) Know three physiologic cones of eye/head movement; 2) Understand how instrument displays comply with these design principles in conventional aircraft and an uninhabited aerial vehicle system. Which of the following is NOT a recognized physiologic principle of instrument display design? Cone of Easy Eye Movement 2) Cone of Binocular Eye Movement 3) Cone of Maximum Eye Movement 4) Cone of Head Movement 5) None of the above. Answer: # 2) Cone of Binocular Eye Movement

Kamine, Tovy Haber↗

NASA NTRS2010

Pilot Aircraft Interface Objectives/Rationale

Objective: Database and proof of concept for guidelines for GCS compliance a) Rationale: 1) Provide research test-bed to develop guidelines. 2) Modify GCS for NAS Compliance to provide proof of concept. b) Approach: 1) Assess current state of GCS technology. 2) Information Requirements Definition. 3) SME Workshop. 4) Modify an Existing GCS for NAS Compliance. 5) Define exemplar UAS (choose system to develop prototype). 6) Define Candidate Displays & Controls. 7) Evaluate/ refine in Simulations. 8) Demonstrate in flight. c) Deliverables: 1) Information Requirements Report. 2) Workshop Proceedings. 3) Technical Reports/ papers on Simulations & Flight Demo. 4) Database for guidelines.

Shively, Jay↗

NASA NTRS2014

System Testing of Ground Cooling System Components

This internship focused primarily upon software unit testing of Ground Cooling System (GCS) components, one of the three types of tests (unit, integrated, and COTS/regression) utilized in software verification. Unit tests are used to test the software of necessary components before it is implemented into the hardware. A unit test determines that the control data, usage procedures, and operating procedures of a particular component are tested to determine if the program is fit for use. Three different files are used to make and complete an efficient unit test. These files include the following: Model Test file (.mdl), Simulink SystemTest (.test), and autotest (.m). The Model Test file includes the component that is being tested with the appropriate Discrete Physical Interface (DPI) for testing. The Simulink SystemTest is a program used to test all of the requirements of the component. The autotest tests that the component passes Model Advisor and System Testing, and puts the results into proper files. Once unit testing is completed on the GCS components they can then be implemented into the GCS Schematic and the software of the GCS model as a whole can be tested using integrated testing. Unit testing is a critical part of software verification; it allows for the testing of more basic components before a model of higher fidelity is tested, making the process of testing flow in an orderly manner.

Unit Test↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

MPATH (Measuring Performance for Autonomy Teaming with Humans) Ground Control Station: Design Approach and Initial Usability Results

Envisioned future Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) operations will require a transition of aircraft command and control from onboard pilots to remote operators. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has developed a research ground control station (GCS) software called MPATH (Measuring Performance for Autonomy Teaming with Humans) to study the human factors of remote operators in a representative AAM environment, where small uncrewed aerial systems (sUAS; simulated or real) act as surrogates for larger AAM aircraft. A primary focus of the research being conducted with the MPATH GCS is scalability (i.e., one human managing multiple vehicles). MPATH has demonstrated to be a useful capability for human factors research and remote operations. Two initial usability studies and a multi-vehicle control assessment were recently conducted, and usability data and operator feedback were collected. Generally, participants rated MPATH high on usability and interface quality, whereas information quality was rated slightly lower. These results were supported by specific feedback. Several generalized GCS design recommendations are proposed based on the results and feedback from these flight activities. Future updates to MPATH will incorporate the proposed recommendations. In practice, these recommendations could be used by any GCS software designer or developer to promote usability and safety.

Advanced Air Mobility↗

NASA NTRS1988

A gamma ray observatory ground attitude error analysis study using the generalized calibration system

The Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) Flight Dynamics Division (FDD) will be responsible for performing ground attitude determination for Gamma Ray Observatory (GRO) support. The study reported in this paper provides the FDD and the GRO project with ground attitude determination error information and illustrates several uses of the Generalized Calibration System (GCS). GCS, an institutional software tool in the FDD, automates the computation of the expected attitude determination uncertainty that a spacecraft will encounter during its mission. The GRO project is particularly interested in the uncertainty in the attitude determination using Sun sensors and a magnetometer when both star trackers are inoperable. In order to examine the expected attitude errors for GRO, a systematic approach was developed including various parametric studies. The approach identifies pertinent parameters and combines them to form a matrix of test runs in GCS. This matrix formed the basis for this study.

Ketchum, E.↗

NASA NTRS1990

GSC configuration management plan

The tools and methods used for the configuration management of the artifacts (including software and documentation) associated with the Guidance and Control Software (GCS) project are described. The GCS project is part of a software error studies research program. Three implementations of GCS are being produced in order to study the fundamental characteristics of the software failure process. The Code Management System (CMS) is used to track and retrieve versions of the documentation and software. Application of the CMS for this project is described and the numbering scheme is delineated for the versions of the project artifacts.

Withers, B. Edward↗

NASA NTRS1990

Software requirements: Guidance and control software development specification

The software requirements for an implementation of Guidance and Control Software (GCS) are specified. The purpose of the GCS is to provide guidance and engine control to a planetary landing vehicle during its terminal descent onto a planetary surface and to communicate sensory information about that vehicle and its descent to some receiving device. The specification was developed using the structured analysis for real time system specification methodology by Hatley and Pirbhai and was based on a simulation program used to study the probability of success of the 1976 Viking Lander missions to Mars. Three versions of GCS are being generated for use in software error studies.

Withers, B. Edward↗

NASA NTRS1998

Framework for Small-Scale Experiments in Software Engineering: Guidance and Control Software Project: Software Engineering Case Study

Software is becoming increasingly significant in today's critical avionics systems. To achieve safe, reliable software, government regulatory agencies such as the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Department of Defense mandate the use of certain software development methods. However, little scientific evidence exists to show a correlation between software development methods and product quality. Given this lack of evidence, a series of experiments has been conducted to understand why and how software fails. The Guidance and Control Software (GCS) project is the latest in this series. The GCS project is a case study of the Requirements and Technical Concepts for Aviation RTCA/DO-178B guidelines, Software Considerations in Airborne Systems and Equipment Certification. All civil transport airframe and equipment vendors are expected to comply with these guidelines in building systems to be certified by the FAA for use in commercial aircraft. For the case study, two implementations of a guidance and control application were developed to comply with the DO-178B guidelines for Level A (critical) software. The development included the requirements, design, coding, verification, configuration management, and quality assurance processes. This paper discusses the details of the GCS project and presents the results of the case study.

Hayhurst, Kelly J.↗

NASA NTRS1999

The Second-Parameter Effect in Metal-Rich Globular Clusters

Recent Hubble Space Telescope (HST) observations have shown that the metal-rich globular clusters (GCs) NGC 6388 and NGC 6441 exhibit a pronounced 2nd parameter effect. Ordinarily metal-rich GCs have only a red horizontal-branch (HB) clump. However, NGC 6388 and NGC 6441 also possess an unexpected population of blue HB stars, indicating that some 2nd parameter is operating in these clusters. Quite remarkably, the HBs in both clusters slope upward with decreasing B -V from the red clump to the top of the blue tail. We review the results of ongoing stellar evolution calculations which indicate (1) that NGC 6388 and NGC 6441 might provide a crucial diagnostic for understanding the origin of the 2nd parameter effect, (2) that differences in age or mass loss along the red-giant branch (RGB) - the two most prominent 2nd parameter candidates - cannot explain the HB morphology of these GCs, and (3) that noncanonical effects involving an enhanced helium abundance or rotation can produce upward sloping HBs. Finally we suggest a new metal-depletion scenario which might help to resolve a baffling conundrum concerning the surface gravities of the blue HB stars in these clusters.

Sweigart, Allen V.↗

NASA NTRS2001

The X-Ray Globular Cluster Population in NGC 1399

We report on X-ray sources detected in the Chandra images of the elliptical galaxy NGC 1399 and identified with globular clusters (GCs). The 8'x 8' Chandra image shows that a large fraction of the 2-10 keV X-ray emission is resolved into point sources, with a luminosity threshold of 5 x 10 (exp 37) ergs s-1. These sources are most likely Low Mass X-ray Binaries (LMXBs). More than 70% of the X-ray sources, in a region imaged by Hubble Space Telescope (HST), are located within GCs. Many of these sources have super-Eddington luminosity (for an accreting neutron star) and their average luminosity is higher than the remaining sources. This association suggests that, in giant elliptical galaxies, luminous X-ray binaries preferentially form in GCs. The spectral properties of the GC and non-GC sources are in most cases similar to those of LMXBs in our galaxy. Two of the brightest sources, one of which is in GC, have a much softer spectra as seen in the high state black hole. The "apparent" super-Eddington luminosity in many cases may be due to multiple LMXB systems within individual GC, but with some of the most extreme luminous systems containing massive black holes.

Angelini, Lorella↗

NASA NTRS2006

Ikhana: A NASA UAS Supporting Long Duration Earth Science Missions

NASA's Ikhana unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) is a General Atomics MQ-9 Predator-B modified to support the conduct of Earth science missions for the NASA Science Mission Directorate through partnerships, other government agencies and universities. Ikhana, a Native American word meaning 'intelligence', can carry over 2000 lbs of atmospheric and remote sensing instruments in the payload bay and external pods. The aircraft is capable of mission durations in excess of 24 hours at altitudes above 40,000 ft. Redundant flight control, avionics, power, and network systems increase the system reliability and allow easier access to public airspace. The aircraft is remotely piloted from a mobile ground control station (GCS) using both C-band line-of-sight and Ku-band over-the-horizon satellite datalinks. NASA's GCS has been modified to support on-site science monitoring, or the downlink data can be networked to remote sites. All ground support systems are designed to be deployable to support global Eart science investigations. On-board support capabilities include an instrumentation system and an Airborne Research Test System (ARTS). The ARTS can host research algorithms that will autonomously command and control on-board sensors, perform sensor health monitoring, conduct data analysis, and request changes to the flight plan to maximize data collection. The ARTS also has the ability to host algorithms that will autonomously control the aircraft trajectory based on sensor needs, (e.g. precision trajectory for repeat pass interferometry) or to optimize mission objectives (e.g. search for specific atmospheric conditions). Standard on-board networks will collect science data for recording and for inclusion in the aircraft's high bandwidth downlink. The Ikhana project will complete GCS development, science support systems integration, external pod integration and flight clearance, and operations crew training in early 2007. A large-area remote sensing mission is currently scheduled for the Summer 2007.

Cobleigh, Brent R.↗