AIAA 5th ATIO And16th Lighter-Than-Air Sys Tech. And Balloon Systems Conferences 2005
DOI: 10.2514/6.2005-7314
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

SATS HVO Concept VAlidation Experiment

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Low-time instrument rated evaluation pilots (EPs) provided experimental data and subjective feedback as they flew the scenarios in experiments using progressively higher fidelity simulation, from a medium fidelity general aviation (GA) computer simulation [5][6] to the Cirrus SR22 aircraft in flight. Consistent early results across the various experiment platforms, including the high-fidelity HVO Flight Experiment, provided confidence in the simulation environment, so later studies of the HVO concept were conducted with the simulation platform.…”
Section: Figure 2 Hvo Validationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Low-time instrument rated evaluation pilots (EPs) provided experimental data and subjective feedback as they flew the scenarios in experiments using progressively higher fidelity simulation, from a medium fidelity general aviation (GA) computer simulation [5][6] to the Cirrus SR22 aircraft in flight. Consistent early results across the various experiment platforms, including the high-fidelity HVO Flight Experiment, provided confidence in the simulation environment, so later studies of the HVO concept were conducted with the simulation platform.…”
Section: Figure 2 Hvo Validationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…6 Three of these scenarios were repeated in the flight experiment. For the simulation experiment the experiment design used for data collection was a 2 (Procedure Type) x 5 (Scenario Type), within-subject design in which the same 15 participants (i.e., low-time instrument rated pilots) were assigned to each experimental cell (i.e., test condition).…”
Section: B Experimental Designmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…• Subject pilots will fly within the FAA's Practical Test Standards (PTS) for the instrument rating 100% of the time during all scenarios • Deviations from assigned flight paths (i.e., RMSE values) will be equivalent across all scenarios Subjective Workload (Baseline & SATS scenarios) -reported in references [6][7][8] • Equivalent workload ratings will be associated with all scenarios Situation Awareness (Baseline & SATS scenarios) reported in references [6][7][8] • Equivalent situation awareness ratings will be associated with all scenarios Procedure Conformance Monitoring (SATS scenarios only) reported in references [6][7][8] • Subject pilots will fly within conformance of the SATS HVO procedures 100% of the time…”
Section: Hypothesesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Simulation subject pilots 1 through 15 (S 1-15 ) were asked to perform all 10 test conditions in partially counterbalanced order under simulated IMC. For the flight experiment, a 2 (Procedure Type) x 3 (Scenario Type), within-subject design was used for data collection and 12 of the same 15 subject pilots (F [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] ) performed six test conditions twice in partially counterbalanced order under simulated IMC. Dependent measures included pilot FTE and subjective assessments of workload and situation awareness.…”
Section: Experiments Design and Proceduresmentioning
confidence: 99%