《空中交通运输系统》（英文版）chapter 12 humanfactors rev4

16.886 Human Factors for Autonomous Formation Flying Mary(Missy) cummings Humans and Automation division aeronautics astronautics Massachusetts Institute of Technology

16.886 Human Factors for Autonomous Formation Flying Mary (Missy) Cummings Humans and Automation Division Aeronautics & Astronautics

Formation Flight Basics Section v, division differences The tighter the formation the higher the workload Implications for system management Wingman uses significantly more fuel Formation flights account for 14 percent of all midairs U.S. Navy photo 叫h

Formation Flight Basics • Section v. division differences • The tighter the formation, the higher the workload – Implications for system management • Wingman uses significantly more fuel • Formation flights account for 14 percent of all midairs U.S. Navy photo

Autonomous Formation Flying in Action Keeping Position http://www.dfrc.nasagov/gallerY/movie/aff/html/em-0081-01.html Refueling httpwww.dfrc.nasagov/gallery/movie/aar/html/em-0053-01.html 叫h

Autonomous Formation Flying in Action Keeping Position • http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Movie/AFF/HTML/EM-0081-01.html Refueling • http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Movie/AAR/HTML/EM-0053-01.html

Position issues Wing must stay within 10% of leads wingspan for 30% fuel savings(Proud et al., 1999) Military:C-17:171,C-141:160,C-5:223 Commercial: 747:196.A300: 147 Previous flights 2001: 55(two F/A-18S)(12% savings) 2003:200(DC-8/F/A-18)(29% savings) Pilots most sensitive to changes in roll The most significant vortex disturbance when positioned for maximum drag reduction is a strong rolling moment effect (Hansen et al., 2002) Vortex turbulence generally avoided Step up and down 叫h

Position Issues • Wing must stay within 10% of lead’s wingspan for 30% fuel savings (Proud et al., 1999): – Military: C-17: 171’, C-141: 160’, C-5: 223’ – Commercial: 747: 196’, A300: 147’ • Previous flights – 2001: 55’ (two F/A-18s) (12% savings) – 2003: 200’ (DC-8/F/A-18) (29% savings) • Pilots most sensitive to changes in roll – The most significant vortex disturbance when positioned for maximum drag reduction is a strong rolling moment effect (Hansen et al., 2002) • Vortex turbulence generally avoided – Step up and down

Spatial disorientation a false perception of ones position and motion with respect to the earth Sensory illusions Primarily due to transition between inside/outside scans Especially prominent in transition between VMC/MC in formation flying False horizons The leans are most commonly felt when flying formation on the wing in the weather or at night (Wright Patt) 叫h

Spatial Disorientation • A false perception of one’s position and motion with respect to the earth – Sensory illusions • Primarily due to transition between inside/outside scans • Especially prominent in transition between VMC/IMC in formation flying – False horizons – “The leans are most commonly felt when flying formation on the wing in the weather or at night (Wright Patt)

Vigilance Issues Sustained attention Not a human strength Vigilance can deteriorate significantly after 30 mins What is the threshold for pilot intervention? False alarms Cost of premature pilot intervention Reaction times could be affected Alerting systems can hell p Advisories versus warnings Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Vigilance Issues • Sustained attention – Not a human strength • Vigilance can deteriorate significantly after 30 mins • What is the threshold for pilot intervention? – False alarms – Cost of premature pilot intervention • Reaction times could be affected • Alerting systems can help – Advisories versus warnings

Previous Flight Test results Air Force flight test center 2&3T-38S October 2001 Pilot workload assessments They found that maintaining the minimum drag formation was a comparable workload to maintaining other types of formations. (not a good thing The longest duration the pilots could maintain the position operationally was approximately 20-30 minutes Recall vigilance discussion Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Previous Flight Test Results • Air Force Flight Test Center, 2 & 3 T-38s – October 2001 • Pilot workload assessments • They found that maintaining the minimum drag formation was a comparable workload to maintaining other types of formations. (not a good thing) • The longest duration the pilots could maintain the position operationally was approximately 20-30 minutes. – Recall vigilance discussion

General research areas Alerting systems Prediction Probabilistic representations Signal detection theory 2D versus 3d displays Is one remarkably better or more confusing than the other? Which one produces more false alarms? · Situation awareness How do these design issues impact pilot's sa for both aff alerting system as well as other systems? 叫h Massachusetts Institute of Technology

General Research Areas • Alerting systems – Prediction – Probabilistic representations – Signal detection theory • 2D versus 3D displays – Is one remarkably better or more confusing than the other? – Which one produces more false alarms? • Situation awareness – How do these design issues impact pilot’s SA for both AFF alerting system as well as other systems?

Signal detection Theory True in the world Pilot Signal Signal Did Response Occurred Not occur Noise Signal Noise Hit False Alarm Hits Occurred 2 False Alarms .15 Beta 1g Did Correct d MiS Not Occur Rejection e5 -86-4-20246810 Sensory Strength Graphgeneratedathttp://psych.hanoveredw/krantz/Std/ d'= sensitivity to signal B= criterion

Signal Detection Theory Correct Rejection Miss Hit False Alarm True in the World Pilot Response Signal Occurred Signal Did Not Occur Signal Occurred Signal Did Not Occur d’ = sensitivity to signal B = criterion Graph generated at http://psych.hanover.edu/Krantz/STD/

Receiver Operating Curves Heze- 0.50 3.00 Noise 1 1.00 0.50 0.00 0.50 100 Sensory Strength or Proportion of False Alarms Graphgeneratedathttp://psych.hanover.edu/krantz/std/ Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Receiver Operating Curves Graph generated at http://psych.hanover.edu/Krantz/STD/