SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “operator”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 1,117 records · Page 62

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2013

An Operational Safety and Certification Assessment of a TASAR EFB Application

This paper presents an overview of a Traffic Aware Strategic Aircrew Requests (TASAR) Electronic Flight Bag application intended to inform the pilot of trajectory improvement opportunities while en route that result in operational benefits. The results of safety analyses and a detailed review of Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulatory documents that establish certification and operational approval requirements are presented for TASAR. The safety analyses indicate that TASAR has a likely Failure Effects Classification of “No Effect,” and at most, is no worse than “Minor Effect.” Based on this safety assessment and the detailed review of FAA regulatory documents that determine certification and operational approval requirements, this study concludes that TASAR can be implemented in the flight deck as a Type B software application hosted on a Class 2 Portable Electronic Device (PED) Electronic Flight Bag (EFB). This implementation approach would provide a relatively low-cost path to certification and operational approval for both retrofit and forward fit implementation, while at the same time facilitating the business case for early ADS-B IN equipage. A preliminary review by FAA certification and operational approvers of the analyses presented here confirmed that the conclusions are appropriate and that TASAR will be considered a Type B application.

Koczo, Stefan↗

NASA NTRS2014

Performance Comparison Between a Head-Worn Display System and a Head-Up Display for Low Visibility Commercial Operations

Research, development, test, and evaluation of flight deck interface technologies is being conducted by NASA to proactively identify, develop, and mature tools, methods, and technologies for improving overall aircraft safety of new and legacy vehicles operating in Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen). Under the Vehicle Systems Safety Technologies (VSST) project in the Aviation Safety Program, one specific area of research is the use of small Head-Worn Displays (HWDs) as an equivalent display to a Head-Up Display (HUD). Title 14 of the US Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 91.175 describes a possible operational credit which can be obtained with airplane equipage of a HUD or an "equivalent" display combined with Enhanced Vision (EV). If successful, a HWD may provide the same safety and operational benefits as current HUD-equipped aircraft but for significantly more aircraft in which HUD installation is neither practical nor possible. A simulation experiment was conducted to evaluate if the HWD, coupled with a head-tracker, can provide an equivalent display to a HUD. Comparative testing was performed in the Research Flight Deck (RFD) Cockpit Motion Facility (CMF) full mission, motion-based simulator at NASA Langley. Twelve airline crews conducted approach and landing, taxi, and departure operations during low visibility operations (1000' Runway Visual Range (RVR), 300' RVR) at Memphis International Airport (Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) identifier: KMEM). The results showed that there were no statistical differences in the crews performance in terms of touchdown and takeoff. Further, there were no statistical differences between the HUD and HWD in pilots' responses to questionnaires.

Arthur, Jarvis J., III↗

NASA NTRS2014

Cost Analysis in a Multi-Mission Operations Environment

Spacecraft control centers have evolved from dedicated, single-mission or single mission-type support to multi-mission, service-oriented support for operating a variety of mission types. At the same time, available money for projects is shrinking and competition for new missions is increasing. These factors drive the need for an accurate and flexible model to support estimating service costs for new or extended missions; the cost model in turn drives the need for an accurate and efficient approach to service cost analysis. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Huntsville Operations Support Center (HOSC) at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) provides operations services to a variety of customers around the world. HOSC customers range from launch vehicle test flights; to International Space Station (ISS) payloads; to small, short duration missions; and has included long duration flagship missions. The HOSC recently completed a detailed analysis of service costs as part of the development of a complete service cost model. The cost analysis process required the team to address a number of issues. One of the primary issues involves the difficulty of reverse engineering individual mission costs in a highly efficient multi-mission environment, along with a related issue of the value of detailed metrics or data to the cost model versus the cost of obtaining accurate data. Another concern is the difficulty of balancing costs between missions of different types and size and extrapolating costs to different mission types. The cost analysis also had to address issues relating to providing shared, cloud-like services in a government environment, and then assigning an uncertainty or risk factor to cost estimates that are based on current technology, but will be executed using future technology. Finally the cost analysis needed to consider how to validate the resulting cost models taking into account the non-homogeneous nature of the available cost data and the decreasing flight rate. This paper presents the issues encountered during the HOSC cost analysis process, and the associated lessons learned. These lessons can be used when planning for a new multi-mission operations center or in the transformation from a dedicated control center to multi-center operations, as an aid in defining processes that support future cost analysis and estimation. The lessons can also be used by mature service-oriented, multi-mission control centers to streamline or refine their cost analysis process.

Felton, Larry↗

NASA NTRS2014

Space Mission Operations Ground Systems Integration Customer Service

The facility, which is now the Huntsville Operations Support Center (HOSC) at Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, AL, has provided continuous space mission and related services for the space industry since 1961, from Mercury Redstone through the International Space Station (ISS). Throughout the long history of the facility and mission support teams, the HOSC has developed a stellar customer support and service process. In this era, of cost cutting, and providing more capability and results with fewer resources, space missions are looking for the most efficient way to accomplish their objectives. One of the first services provided by the facility was fax transmission of documents to, then, Cape Canaveral in Florida. The headline in the Marshall Star, the newspaper for the newly formed Marshall Space Flight Center, read "Exact copies of Documents sent to Cape in 4 minutes." The customer was Dr. Wernher von Braun. Currently at the HOSC we are supporting, or have recently supported, missions ranging from simple ISS payloads requiring little more than "bentpipe" telemetry access, to a low cost free-flyer Fast, Affordable, Science and Technology Satellite (FASTSAT), to a full service ISS payload Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer 2 (AMS2) supporting 24/7 operations at three operations centers around the world with an investment of over 2 billion dollars. The HOSC has more need and desire than ever to provide fast and efficient customer service to support these missions. Here we will outline how our customer-centric service approach reduces the cost of providing services, makes it faster and easier than ever for new customers to get started with HOSC services, and show what the future holds for our space mission operations customers. We will discuss our philosophy concerning our responsibility and accessibility to a mission customer as well as how we deal with the following issues: initial contact with a customer, reducing customer cost, changing regulations and security, and cultural differences, to ensure an efficient response to customer issues using a small Customer Service Team (CST) and adaptability, constant communication with customers, technical expertise and knowledge of services, and dedication to customer service. The HOSC Customer Support Team has implemented a variety of processes, and procedures that help to mitigate the potential problems that arise when integrating ground system services for a variety of complex missions and the lessons learned from this experience will lead the future of customer service in the space operations industry.

Roth, Karl↗

NASA NTRS2014

Designing an Alternate Mission Operations Control Room

The Huntsville Operations Support Center (HOSC) is a multi-project facility that is responsible for 24x7 real-time International Space Station (ISS) payload operations management, integration, and control and has the capability to support small satellite projects and will provide real-time support for SLS launches. The HOSC is a service-oriented/ highly available operations center for ISS payloads-directly supporting science teams across the world responsible for the payloads. The HOSC is required to endure an annual 2-day power outage event for facility preventive maintenance and safety inspection of the core electro-mechanical systems. While complete system shut-downs are against the grain of a highly available sub-system, the entire facility must be powered down for a weekend for environmental and safety purposes. The consequence of this ground system outage is far reaching: any science performed on ISS during this outage weekend is lost. Engineering efforts were focused to maximize the ISS investment by engineering a suitable solution capable of continuing HOSC services while supporting safety requirements. The HOSC Power Outage Contingency (HPOC) System is a physically diversified compliment of systems capable of providing identified real-time services for the duration of a planned power outage condition from an alternate control room. HPOC was designed to maintain ISS payload operations for approximately three continuous days during planned HOSC power outages and support a local Payload Operations Team, International Partners, as well as remote users from the alternate control room located in another building.

Montgomery, Patty↗

NASA NTRS2014

Cost Analysis In A Multi-Mission Operations Environment

Spacecraft control centers have evolved from dedicated, single-mission or single missiontype support to multi-mission, service-oriented support for operating a variety of mission types. At the same time, available money for projects is shrinking and competition for new missions is increasing. These factors drive the need for an accurate and flexible model to support estimating service costs for new or extended missions; the cost model in turn drives the need for an accurate and efficient approach to service cost analysis. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Huntsville Operations Support Center (HOSC) at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) provides operations services to a variety of customers around the world. HOSC customers range from launch vehicle test flights; to International Space Station (ISS) payloads; to small, short duration missions; and has included long duration flagship missions. The HOSC recently completed a detailed analysis of service costs as part of the development of a complete service cost model. The cost analysis process required the team to address a number of issues. One of the primary issues involves the difficulty of reverse engineering individual mission costs in a highly efficient multimission environment, along with a related issue of the value of detailed metrics or data to the cost model versus the cost of obtaining accurate data. Another concern is the difficulty of balancing costs between missions of different types and size and extrapolating costs to different mission types. The cost analysis also had to address issues relating to providing shared, cloud-like services in a government environment, and then assigning an uncertainty or risk factor to cost estimates that are based on current technology, but will be executed using future technology. Finally the cost analysis needed to consider how to validate the resulting cost models taking into account the non-homogeneous nature of the available cost data and the decreasing flight rate. This paper presents the issues encountered during the HOSC cost analysis process, and the associated lessons learned. These lessons can be used when planning for a new multi-mission operations center or in the transformation from a dedicated control center to multi-center operations, as an aid in defining processes that support future cost analysis and estimation. The lessons can also be used by mature serviceoriented, multi-mission control centers to streamline or refine their cost analysis process.

Newhouse, M.↗

NASA NTRS2014

An Overview of the Concept of Operations for Assembly, Integration, Testing and Ground Servicing Developed for the MPCV-ESM Propulsion System

A concept of operations for the Assembly, Integration and Testing (AIT) and the Ground Systems Development Operations (GSDO) of the European Service Module (ESM) propulsion system has been developed. The AIT concept of operations covers all fabrication, integration and testing activities in both Europe and in the United States. The GSDO Program develops the facilities, equipment, and procedures for the loading of hypergolic propellants, the filling of high-pressure gases, and contingency de-servicing operations for the ESM. NASA and ESA along with the Lockheed Martin and Airbus Space and Defense are currently working together for the EM-1 and EM-2 missions in which the ESM will be flown as part of the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV). The NASA/ESA SM propulsion team is collaborating with the AIT personnel from ESA/Airbus and NASA/Lockheed Martin to ensure successful integration of the European designed Service Module propulsion system, the Lockheed Martin designed Crew Module Adapter and the heritage Space Shuttle Orbital Maneuvering System Engines (OMS-E) being provided as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE). This paper will provide an overview of the current AIT and GSDO concept of operations for the ESM propulsion system.

Propulsion↗

NASA NTRS2014

An Overview of the Concept of Operations for Assembly, Integration, Testing and Ground Servicing Developed for the MPCV-ESM Propulsion System

Ground Servicing↗

NASA NTRS2013

Modeling Operations Costs for Human Exploration Architectures

Operations and support (O&S) costs for human spaceflight have not received the same attention in the cost estimating community as have development costs. This is unfortunate as O&S costs typically comprise a majority of life-cycle costs (LCC) in such programs as the International Space Station (ISS) and the now-cancelled Constellation Program. Recognizing this, the Constellation Program and NASA HQs supported the development of an O&S cost model specifically for human spaceflight. This model, known as the Exploration Architectures Operations Cost Model (ExAOCM), provided the operations cost estimates for a variety of alternative human missions to the moon, Mars, and Near-Earth Objects (NEOs) in architectural studies. ExAOCM is philosophically based on the DoD Architecture Framework (DoDAF) concepts of operational nodes, systems, operational functions, and milestones. This paper presents some of the historical background surrounding the development of the model, and discusses the underlying structure, its unusual user interface, and lastly, previous examples of its use in the aforementioned architectural studies.

cost estimating↗

NASA NTRS2012

Launch Pad Closeout Operations for the Mars Science Laboratory's Heat Rejection System

The Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) rover was launched on an Atlas V on November 26, 2011. Preparations were carried out prior to launch in order to closeout the spacecraft's complex heat rejection system (HRS), which consists of two mechanically pumped CFC-11 fluid loops. The first HRS loop, onboard the Curiosity rover, was fully integrated, filled with CFC-11, and successfully operated prior to launch pad operations; however, the second thermal loop, called the cruise HRS loop, required final mechanical and thermal integration activities to occur while on the launch pad in order to accommodate the last minute installation of the rover's Multi-Mission Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator (MMRTG) power source. In order to prevent overheating of propellant tanks and critical avionics equipment buried deep within the spacecraft's aeroshell, the MMRTG needed to be pre-cooled using a separate non-flight mechanically pumped fluid loop prior to and during the final closeout and subsequent startup of the flight loop. This paper outlines the various steps that took place to safely install the MMRTG while carefully transitioning from the pre-cooling operation to the final startup and operation of the flight cruise HRS loop. Temperature data of the launch pad thermal transition from the ground support loop activity to the final flight loop operation is presented. Some background development of the ground support loop and lessons learned are also discussed. This successful launch pad integration activity required a close-knit coordination between NASA KSC, JPL, the Department of Energy, Idaho National Labs, Pratt and Whitney Rocketdyne Inc., Teledyne Technologies Inc., ULA, and Advanced Thermal Sciences Corp.

thermal↗

NASA NTRS2010

Moving Toward Space Internetworking via DTN: Its Operational Challenges, Benefits, and Management

The international space community has begun to recognize that the established model for management of communications with spacecraft - commanded data transmission over individual pair-wise contacts - is operationally unwieldy and will not scale in support of increasingly complex and sophisticated missions such as NASA's Constellation project. Accordingly, the international Inter-Agency Operations Advisory Group (IOAG) ichartered a Space Internetworking Strategy Group (SISG), which released its initial recommendations in a November 2008 report. The report includes a recommendation that the space flight community adopt Delay-Tolerant Networking (DTN) to address the problem of interoperability and communication scaling, especially in mission environments where there are multiple spacecraft operating in concert. This paper explores some of the issues that must be addressed in implementing, deploying, and operating DTN as part of a multi-mission, multi-agency space internetwork as well as benefits and future operational scenarios afforded by DTN-based space internetworking.

Delay Tolerant Networking↗

NASA NTRS2016

Analog Testing of Operations Concepts for Mitigation of Communication Latency During Human Space Exploration

OBJECTIVES: NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) is an underwater spaceflight analog that allows a true mission‐like operational environment and uses buoyancy effects and added weight to simulate different gravity levels. Three missions were undertaken from 2014‐2015, NEEMO's 18‐20. All missions were performed at the Aquarius undersea research habitat. During each mission, the effects of varying operations concepts and tasks type and complexity on representative communication latencies associated with Mars missions were studied. METHODS: 12 subjects (4 per mission) were weighed out to simulate near‐zero or partial gravity extravehicular activity (EVA) and evaluated different operations concepts for integration and management of a simulated Earth‐based science backroom team (SBT) to provide input and direction during exploration activities. Exploration traverses were planned in advance based on precursor data collected. Subjects completed science‐related tasks including presampling surveys, geologic‐based sampling, and marine‐based sampling as a portion of their tasks on saturation dives up to 4 hours in duration that were to simulate extravehicular activity (EVA) on Mars or the moons of Mars. One‐way communication latencies, 5 and 10 minutes between space and mission control, were simulated throughout the missions. Objective data included task completion times, total EVA times, crew idle time, translation time, SBT assimilation time (defined as time available for SBT to discuss data/imagery after it has been collected, in addition to the time taken to watch imagery streaming over latency). Subjective data included acceptability, simulation quality, capability assessment ratings, and comments. RESULTS: Precursor data can be used effectively to plan and execute exploration traverse EVAs (plans included detailed location of science sites, high‐fidelity imagery of the sites, and directions to landmarks of interest within a site). Operations concepts that allow for presampling surveys enable efficient traverse execution and meaningful Mission Control Center (MCC) interaction across long communication latencies and can be done with minimal crew idle time. Imagery and information from the EVA crew that is transmitted real‐time to the intravehicular (IV) crewmember(s) can be used to verify that exploration traverse plans are being executed correctly. That same data can be effectively used by MCC (across comm latency) to provide further instructions to the crew from a SBT on sampling priorities, additional tasks, and changes to the plan. Text / data capabilities are preferred over voice capabilities between MCC and IV when executing exploration traverse plans over communication latency. Autonomous crew planning tools can be effective at modifying existing plans if the objectives and constraints are clearly defined.

Chappell, Steven P.↗

NASA NTRS2015

System-Oriented Runway Management Concept of Operations

This document describes a concept for runway management that maximizes the overall efficiency of arrival and departure operations at an airport or group of airports. Specifically, by planning airport runway configurations/usage, it focuses on the efficiency with which arrival flights reach their parking gates from their arrival fixes and departure flights exit the terminal airspace from their parking gates. In the future, the concept could be expanded to include the management of other limited airport resources. While most easily described in the context of a single airport, the concept applies equally well to a group of airports that comprise a metroplex (i.e., airports in close proximity that share resources such that operations at the airports are at least partially dependent) by including the coordination of runway usage decisions between the airports. In fact, the potential benefit of the concept is expected to be larger in future metroplex environments due to the increasing need to coordinate the operations at proximate airports to more efficiently share limited airspace resources. This concept, called System-Oriented Runway Management (SORM), is further broken down into a set of airport traffic management functions that share the principle that operational performance must be measured over the complete surface and airborne trajectories of the airport's arrivals and departures. The "system-oriented" term derives from the belief that the traffic management objective must consider the efficiency of operations over a wide range of aircraft movements and National Airspace System (NAS) dynamics. The SORM concept is comprised of three primary elements: strategic airport capacity planning, airport configuration management, and combined arrival/departure runway planning. Some aspects of the SORM concept, such as using airport configuration management1 as a mechanism for improving aircraft efficiency, are novel. Other elements (e.g., runway scheduling, which is a part of combined arrival/departure runway scheduling) have been well studied, but are included in the concept for completeness and to allow the concept to define the necessary relationship among the elements. The goal of this document is to describe the overall SORM concept and how it would apply both within the NAS and potential future Next Generation Air Traffic System (NextGen) environments, including research conducted to date. Note that the concept is based on the belief that runways are the primary constraint and the decision point for controlling efficiency, but the efficiency of runway management must be measured over a wide range of space and time. Implementation of the SORM concept is envisioned through a collection of complementary, necessary capabilities collectively focused on ensuring efficient arrival and departure traffic management, where that efficiency is measured not only in terms of runway efficiency but in terms of the overall trajectories between parking gates and transition fixes. For the more original elements of the concept-airport configuration management-this document proposes specific air traffic management (ATM) decision-support automation for realizing the concept.

Lohr, Gary W.↗

NASA NTRS2008

Orbit Control Operations for the Cassini-Huygens Mission

The Cassini-Huygens spacecraft was launched in 1997 as an international and collaborative mission to study Saturn and its many moons. After a seven-year cruise, Cassini began orbiting Saturn for a four- year tour. This tour consists of 157 planned maneuvers, and their back-up locations, designed to target 52 encounters, mostly of Saturn's largest moon Titan. One of the mission's first activities was to release the Huygens probe to Titan in December 2004. Currently in its last year of the prime mission, Cassini-Huygens continues to obtain valuable data on Saturn, Titan, and Saturn's other satellites. Return of this information is in large part due to a healthy spacecraft and successful navigation. A two-year extended mission, beginning July 2008, will offer the opportunity to continue science activities. With a demanding navigation schedule that compares with the prime tour, the Cassini Navigation team relies on operations procedures developed during the prime mission to carry-out the extended mission objectives. Current processes for orbit control operations evolved from the primary navigational requirement of staying close to predetermined targeting conditions according to Cassini science sequence planning. The reference trajectory is comprised of flyby conditions to be accomplished at minimal propellant cost. Control of the planned reference trajectory orbit, and any trajectory updates, is achieved with the execution of Orbit Trim Maneuvers (OTMs). The procedures for designing, processing, and analyzing OTMs during Cassini operations is presented. First, a brief overview of the Cassini-Huygens Mission is given, followed by a general description of navigation. Orbit control and maneuver execution methods are defined, along with an outline of the orbit control staffing and operations philosophy. Finally, an example schedule of orbit control operations is shown.

navigation↗

NASA NTRS2008

Implications of Operational Pressure on CSSE PGS Design

The Constellation Spacesuit Element (CSSE) was required to support crew survival (CS); launch, entry, and abort (LEA) scenarios; zero gravity (0-g) extravehicular activity (EVA) (both unscheduled and contingency); and planetary EVA. Operation of the CSSE in all of these capacities required a pressure garment subsystem (PGS) that would operate efficiently through various pressure profiles. The PGS team initiated a study to determine the appropriate operational pressure profile of the CSSE and how this selection would affect the design of the CSSE PGS. This study included an extensive review of historical PGS operational pressure selection and the operational effects of those pressures, the presentation of four possible pressure paradigm options for use by the CSSE, the risks and design impacts of these options, and the down-selected pressure option.

Lee, Ryan↗

NASA NTRS2016

NEEMO 20: Science Training, Operations, and Tool Development

The 20th mission of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) was a highly integrated evaluation of operational protocols and tools designed to enable future exploration beyond low-Earth orbit. NEEMO 20 was conducted from the Aquarius habitat off the coast of Key Largo, FL in July 2015. The habitat and its surroundings provide a convincing analog for space exploration. A crew of six (comprised of astronauts, engineers, and habitat technicians) lived and worked in and around the unique underwater laboratory over a mission duration of 14-days. Incorporated into NEEMO 20 was a diverse Science Team (ST) comprised of geoscientists from the Astromaterials Research and Exploration Science (ARES/XI) Division from the Johnson Space Center (JSC), as well as marine scientists from the Department of Biological Sciences at Florida International University (FIU). This team trained the crew on the science to be conducted, defined sampling techniques and operational procedures, and planned and coordinated the science focused Extra Vehicular Activities (EVAs). The primary science objectives of NEEMO 20 was to study planetary sampling techniques and tools in partial gravity environments under realistic mission communication time delays and operational pressures. To facilitate these objectives two types of science sites were employed 1) geoscience sites with available rocks and regolith for testing sampling procedures and tools and, 2) marine science sites dedicated to specific research focused on assessing the photosynthetic capability of corals and their genetic connectivity between deep and shallow reefs. These marine sites and associated research objectives included deployment of handheld instrumentation, context descriptions, imaging, and sampling; thus acted as a suitable proxy for planetary surface exploration activities. This abstract briefly summarizes the scientific training, scientific operations, and tool development conducted during NEEMO 20 with an emphasis on the primary lessons learned.

Graff, T.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Using Vision System Technologies for Offset Approaches in Low Visibility Operations

Flight deck-based vision systems, such as Synthetic Vision Systems (SVS) and Enhanced Flight Vision Systems (EFVS), have the potential to provide additional margins of safety for aircrew performance and enable the implementation of operational improvements for low visibility surface, arrival, and departure operations in the terminal environment with equivalent efficiency to visual operations. Twelve air transport-rated crews participated in a motion-base simulation experiment to evaluate the use of SVS/EFVS in Next Generation Air Transportation System low visibility approach and landing operations at Chicago O'Hare airport. Three monochromatic, collimated head-up display (HUD) concepts (conventional HUD, SVS HUD, and EFVS HUD) and three instrument approach types (straight-in, 3-degree offset, 15-degree offset) were experimentally varied to test the efficacy of the SVS/EFVS HUD concepts for offset approach operations. The findings suggest making offset approaches in low visibility conditions with an EFVS HUD or SVS HUD appear feasible. Regardless of offset approach angle or HUD concept being flown, all approaches had comparable ILS tracking during the instrument segment and were within the lateral confines of the runway with acceptable sink rates during the visual segment of the approach. Keywords: Enhanced Flight Vision Systems; Synthetic Vision Systems; Head-up Display; NextGen

Kramer, Lynda J.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Assessing Dual Sensor Enhanced Flight Vision Systems to Enable Equivalent Visual Operations

Flight deck-based vision system technologies, such as Synthetic Vision (SV) and Enhanced Flight Vision Systems (EFVS), may serve as a revolutionary crew/vehicle interface enabling technologies to meet the challenges of the Next Generation Air Transportation System Equivalent Visual Operations (EVO) concept - that is, the ability to achieve the safety of current-day Visual Flight Rules (VFR) operations and maintain the operational tempos of VFR irrespective of the weather and visibility conditions. One significant challenge lies in the definition of required equipage on the aircraft and on the airport to enable the EVO concept objective. A motion-base simulator experiment was conducted to evaluate the operational feasibility, pilot workload and pilot acceptability of conducting straight-in instrument approaches with published vertical guidance to landing, touchdown, and rollout to a safe taxi speed in visibility as low as 300 ft runway visual range by use of onboard vision system technologies on a Head-Up Display (HUD) without need or reliance on natural vision. Twelve crews evaluated two methods of combining dual sensor (millimeter wave radar and forward looking infrared) EFVS imagery on pilot-flying and pilot-monitoring HUDs as they made approaches to runways with and without touchdown zone and centerline lights. In addition, the impact of adding SV to the dual sensor EFVS imagery on crew flight performance, workload, and situation awareness during extremely low visibility approach and landing operations was assessed. Results indicate that all EFVS concepts flown resulted in excellent approach path tracking and touchdown performance without any workload penalty. Adding SV imagery to EFVS concepts provided situation awareness improvements but no discernible improvements in flight path maintenance.

Kramer, Lynda J.↗