Digital Avionics HMI/Displays


Published on

1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • I would like to speak on Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) as it fits within the NextGen and SESAR (Single European Sky ATM Research) programs. The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) leads in the safe and orderly development of all aspects of international civil aeronautics for global air traffic management, communication, navigation and surveillance. During this time, I will discuss: ADS-B surveillance capabilitiesADS-B displays: How is the data presented? Which leads to the next logical step of consideration:The Human Machine Interface (HMI)Considerations for further studyAnd take Questions.
  • I studied the effectiveness of ADS-B within the population of the United States National Airspace (NAS). The results of my study clearly showed a vast reduction in the percentage of accident / incident rates between the pre- and post-ADS-B periods for the Alaskan region ranging from 25.32% for CFR parts 91, 121 & 135 up to 32.09% for only CFR part 135 air carriers. During this same period, the reduction of the accident / incident rates for the NAS only dropped 11.03% for CFR parts 91, 121 & 135, remained stagnant for CFR parts 121 & 135 and only reduced by 11.64% for CFR 135 air carriers. The result: ADS-B was a significant factor in the reduction of accidents and incidents within the test area for the test period. Currently the FAA only mandates ADS-B out. That is the aircraft data is only being sent out to air traffic control for “see and avoid” purposes. Other aircraft are not mandated to receive and display this data.
  • During the FAA testing period, ADS-B was displayed on Flight Management Systems (FMS) showing the aircraft position on two displays showing both vertical and horizontal representations of the aircraft within space above the ground. If you will note a light blue diamond in the upper left quadrant of the first display, then reference that same blue diamond on the bottom left quadrant of the second display. This allows you to be able to identify that the target aircraft is flying ahead of you at the 1130 clockwise position and at your altitude.You may also notice another blue diamond in the upper right hand quadrant of the first display but it is not present within the second display because it is at your 3 o’clock position. Correlating information from both displays provides an accurate situational awareness of both aircraft and terrain. This scenario employs ADS-B in and out. That is, the signal from each aircraft is sent to all other aircraft while data is also received and displayed from all like equipped aircraft.According to the FAA, “The full potential of ADS–B In may allow flight crews to plot the most efficient flight path without ATC instructions. Flight crews in ADS–B In-equipped aircraft may be able to locate other traffic, identify crossing flight paths, and adjust their flight path to remove any conflicts. ADS–B In also would sustain the level of flight safety provided by radar-based surveillance systems, and may support reduced traffic separation distances and allow for increased traffic volumes. Before implementing ADS–B In, the FAA needs to establish performance standards for each ADS–B In application, establish standards for the subsystems necessary to support the expanded operations, and certificate ADS–B In cockpit display systems. Additionally, the FAA will need to make decisions about electronic flight bags (EFB), as an alternative to integrated cockpit displays. ADS–B In is a major element of the future surveillance technology mix planned by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Global Air Navigation Plan”.
  • This slide shows optional display configurations of flight data that includes ADS-B and others such as Traffic Information Service (TIS-B). This is where the paradigms of industry leaders directly affect the Human Machine Interface (HMI). Let’s be realistic in acknowledging that the market is pushing certain aspects onto the Avionics systems being produced. We all know that the American mentality is that larger is better. Therefore, a paradigm exists that makes us want to place more data about everything that a person might want to see on the cockpit displays. The market is currently pushing aircraft avionics systems to be totally independent. Advances in UAV technology have made major steps in these directions viable. We dare not mention this to airline passengers, but all major avionics producers are moving in the direction of total autonomy. And you know this is true. Aircraft pilots today only fly 5 to 8 minute segments of flights while not on the flight director. Many airlines are forcing this due to other market factors such as avionics package costs, associated training costs, high fuel costs, etc.This creates situations that can lead to the following…
  • In the most recent fatal airline crash in the U.S., in 2009 near Buffalo, N.Y., the co-pilot of a regional airliner programmed incorrect information into the plane's computers, causing it to slow to an unsafe speed. That triggered a stall warning. The startled captain, who hadn't noticed the plane had slowed too much, responded by repeatedly pulling back on the control yoke, overriding two safety systems, when the correct procedure was to push forward.An investigation later found there were no mechanical or structural problems that would have prevented the plane from flying if the captain had responded correctly. Instead, his actions caused an aerodynamic stall. The plane plummeted to earth, killing all 49 people aboard and one on the ground.
  • Two weeks after the New York accident, a Turkish Airlines Boeing 737 crashed into a field while trying to land in Amsterdam. Nine people were killed and 120 injured. An investigation found that one of the plane's altimeters, which measures altitude, had fed incorrect information to the plane's computers.That, in turn, caused the auto-throttle to reduce speed to a dangerously slow level so that the plane lost lift and stalled. Dutch investigators described the flight's three pilots' "automation surprise" when they discovered the plane was about to stall. They hadn't been closely monitoring the airspeed. Why were they flying the flight director on short final approach?
  • Last month, French investigators recommended that all pilots get mandatory training in manual flying and handling a high-altitude stall. The recommendations were in response to the 2009 crash of an Air France jet flying from Brazil to Paris. All 228 people aboard were killed.An investigation found that airspeed sensors fed bad information to the Airbus A330's computers. That caused the autopilot to disengage suddenly and a stall warning to activate.The co-pilot at the controls struggled to save the plane, but because he kept pointing the plane's nose up, he actually caused the stall instead of preventing it, experts said. Despite the bad airspeed information, which lasted for less than a minute, there was nothing to prevent the plane from continuing to fly if the pilot had followed the correct procedure for such circumstances, which is to continue to fly levelly in the same direction at the same speed while trying to determine the nature of the problem, they said.In such cases, the pilots and the technology are failing together, said former US Airways Capt. Chesley "Sully" Sullenberger, whose precision flying is credited with saving all 155 people aboard an Airbus A320 after it lost power in a collision with Canada geese shortly after takeoff from New York's LaGuardia Airport two years ago. "If we only look at the pilots - the human factor - then we are ignoring other important factors," he said. "We have to look at how they work together."
  • I would like to ask you to bare with me for a moment. As a commercial pilot and systems engineer, I am familiar with safe flight operations, the need for situational awareness and the ability to access large amounts of data within the confines of the cockpit. I would suggest that a direction to research would be to define the LEAST amount of information that a pilot must have in order to meet all safety of flight issues within the new airspace system with 4D requirements. Might I suggest that engine, transmission and warning data be displayed at all times. Then add heading and navigation data. From that point, communication and mechanical positions of flaps, etc.Warning indications should be amber and red. Amber means “address this issue or you are going to get hurt” and red means “address this issue or you are going to die”. What does magenta mean to me? Nothing! It is my opinion that we need to simplify the cockpit displays, not make them more intricate. Market factors are forcing operators to reduce training time. Continued higher fuel prices are creating a downward force on pilot, mechanic and other operator pay scales. Lesser experienced pilots are flying more and more intricately complex aircraft. This cannot continue without a price being paid. Please work with me and within your organizations to respond to all the market forces and not just the ones that are politically expedient.There are lots of brilliant people creating better graphical representations of instrumentation and flight envelope information on flight displays. Let us add to that brilliance, temperance and cockpit experience.
  • Digital Avionics HMI/Displays

    1. 1. Dr. Greg S. Gardner1/7/2013 30th Digital Avionics Systems Conference 1
    2. 2. 1/7/2013 30th Digital Avionics Systems Conference 2
    3. 3. ADS-B within the FAA: System Overview1/7/2013 30th Digital Avionics Systems Conference 3
    4. 4. How ADS-B was originally displayed FMS view of terrain in both the horizontal and vertical planes (Capstone, 2005).1/7/2013 30th Digital Avionics Systems Conference 4
    5. 5. Optional configuration of ADS-B displaycombining Traffic Information Service – Broadcast (TIS-B)1/7/2013 30th Digital Avionics Systems Conference 5
    6. 6. Colgan Air Flight 34071/7/2013 30th Digital Avionics Systems Conference 6
    7. 7. Turkish Airlines Flight TK19511/7/2013 30th Digital Avionics Systems Conference 7
    8. 8. Air France Flight 4471/7/2013 30th Digital Avionics Systems Conference 8
    9. 9. Brilliant people are not always the most safety consciousAn instant later, both Professor Waxman, and his time machine are obliterated, leaving the cold-blooded / warm-blooded dinosaur debate still unresolved. 1/7/2013 30th Digital Avionics Systems Conference 9
    10. 10. 1/7/2013 30th Digital Avionics Systems Conference 10