Delft Aerospace Tunnel-in-the-Sky Flight Tests

The International Journal of Aviation Psychology

2007

Perspective flight-path displays allow pilots to accurately follow complex curved approach trajectories. The current practice to define the tunnel reference trajectory as a concatenation of straight and circular segments, however, leads to difficult transition maneuvers between these segments, strongly contributing to pilot workload. To achieve a smooth interception, clothoid transition paths can be inserted between the straight and circular sections. A clothoid function defines a trajectory curvature that changes from 0 (a straight trajectory) to the desired curvature (the circular trajectory) in a certain amount of space traveled. Because the reference path better matches the natural aircraft response, the clothoid transients are hypothesized to make the task of flying complex curved approaches easier. A pilot-in-the-loop experiment, conducted in a fixed-base flight simulator, confirms this hypothesis and shows that clothoid-augmented trajectories yield improved path-following performance, require fewer pilot control actions, and result in higher comfort levels.Curved approach profiles are expected to increase the flexibility of air traffic management near large airports. Flying these inevitably more complex approaches results in a higher task demand load and requires a high level of pilot situation awareness. Improving the transfer of information to the pilot through intuitive, pictorial displays can mitigate these problems considerably. Research indicates that perspective flight-path displays, such as the tunnel-in-the-sky dis-

Section: Advanced Trajectory Designmentioning

confidence: 97%

mentioning

confidence: 97%

Clothoid-Augmented Trajectories for Perspective Flight-Path Displays

Brandse

The International Journal of Aviation Psychology

2007

“…The flight tests, conducted in May 2001, included two experiments and three demonstration flights. 16 Only the results of the experiment addressing the effects of the tunnel size will be described. elementary tunnel display was employed: Except for the basic tunnel geometry, no additional symbology (such as a flight-path vector symbol) was presented.…”

Section: Experiments 2: Tunnel Tracking In Real Flightmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…16 of nine parts of the trajectory were selected, labeled blocks. Here only the data for the two blocks on the final approach are analyzed: blocks 1 and 2 in Fig.…”

Section: Data Analysis Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cybernetic Analysis of Perspective Flight-Path Display Dimensions

Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics

2005

Perspective flight-path displays, presenting the future trajectory to be flown through a three-dimensional tunnelor highway-in-the-sky, are likely to become the primary flight displays of future cockpits. A crucial design parameter is the size of the virtual tunnel as it determines the tradeoff between pilot path-following performance and workload. An information-theoretical and control-theoretical analysis is presented that aims at gaining an in-depth understanding of the effects of the tunnel size on pilot manual control behavior. The theoretical findings are verified in two pilot-in-the-loop experiments, one conducted in a fixed-base simulator and one in real flight. In the simulator experiment, it is shown that through pilot multiloop model identification the effects of reducing the tunnel size can be directly related to pilot/vehicle bandwidth and stability margins. The use of pilot models allows an objective quantitative analysis of the effect of the tunnel size compared to the subjective, qualitative surveys conducted in the past. The flight-test experiment supports the main findings of the simulator experiment but also reveals that pilot performance in actual flight is less consistent and also lower than measured in the flight simulator. NomenclatureH t = tunnel height V tas = aircraft true airspeed v e = aircraft vertical position error W t = tunnel width x e = aircraft lateral position error γ e = aircraft flight-path angle error δ a , δ e = aileron, elevator control φ, θ = aircraft roll, pitch attitude ϕ m = phase margin χ e = aircraft track angle error ψ e = aircraft heading angle error ω c = crossover frequency

“…Problems have been reported when accurately flying curved trajectories in the presence of wind and in situations where the nominal tunnel trajectory requires rapid changes in the aircraft flight condition. 26,34,47,48 Surprisingly, also the gain in global situation awareness is debated, as some believe that the compelling nature of the three-dimensional display leads pilots to focus too much on the guidance tasks related with the display and ignore other aspects of flight. This is referred to as 'cognitive funneling', or 'cognitive capture'.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Perspective Guidance Displays Show the Way Ahead

Journal of Aerospace Computing, Information, and Communication

Paassen

2004

LITTLE over two decades ago, programmable electronic flight instrument display systems (EFIS) were introduced in commercial aviation aircraft such as the Boeing B757/767. The introduction comprised three new instruments: the primary flight display (PFD), replacing the traditional attitude director indicator (ADI); the navigation display (ND), replacing the horizontal situation indicator (HSI); and the engine indicating and crew alerting system (EICAS), replacing the engine gauges and a whole slew of other indicators and controls. This introduction changed the face of the cockpit flight instrument panels in civil aviation, earning its nickname of "glass cockpit". However, more than the mere looks of the flight deck changed. The flight management system (FMS) got a central role in the flight practice, and piloting changed, from interaction with the aircraft supported by some automation to interaction mainly with the automated systems.The introduction of the glass cockpit and the new way of flying civil transport aircraft through automation was reluctantly accepted by the pilot community. Besides early complaints about the readability of EFIS displays, the main issues were the problems of keeping the pilot in the loop, and explaining what the automation is doing at any time, supporting the flight crew "mode awareness". Still, as accident statistics now show, safety has increased and nowadays flight decks with EFIS and FMS are the norm for commercial and business aviation, and are introduced even in general aviation.With the introduction of the glass cockpit came an increased level of navigational situation awareness, in particular through the added functionality of the navigation display. Its forebear, the HSI, showed an abstract presentation of relative bearings to selected beacons and the distance expressed in dots to VOR radials or the localizer. The ND replaced this by a much more intuitive display of relative geographical position with respect to waypoints on the planned route, approach fixes, markers, and the runway centerline. A planned approach was now visible on the display rather than just on an approach plate. As altitude and speed constraints could be assigned to waypoints in an approach procedure, the energy management during an approach, which depended so far on rough mental computations, was significantly improved as well.Although the electronic instruments offer much more functionality and integrated information than their electromechanical counterparts, they still are not more than two-dimensional "orthogonal" presentations of attitude and geographical position which the pilot must mentally integrate. There must be a world of possibilities in the electronic instrumentation that we have only begun to explore. Unlike autonomous robotic vehicles, humans are capable of interpreting and moving through dynamic three-dimensional environments with little or no conscious mental effort. This talent to intuitively do things right, to not become disoriented or collide with obstacles while moving through the mos...