Simulated Decrab Maneuver: Evaluation with a Pilot Perception Model

Groen, Eric L.; Smaïli, M.H.; Hosman, Ruud

doi:10.2514/6.2005-6108

Cited by 6 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, only one participant could correctly identify the no-motion condition every time. Groen, Smaili, and Hosman 49 found similar results, also during a decrab maneuver in a similar -yet generic -transport airplane simulated in the 6-DOF-hexapod NLR Generic Fighter Operations Research Cockpit Environment (GFORCE) simulator with OTW view but only basic F-16 fighter cockpit instruments. In this study, airline pilots perceived increases in motion strength when the motion was on compared to off, but pilots reported feeling motion more than 70% of the time when absolutely no motion was present in visual meteorological conditions.…”

Section: Empirical Worksupporting

confidence: 63%

Flight Simulator Motion Literature Pertinent to Airline-Pilot Recurrent Training and Evaluation

Burki-Cohen¹,

Sparko²,

Bellman³

2011

AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There has been much debate over the years regarding the need for flight simulator motion for airline-pilot training and evaluation. From the intuitive perspective there is the dictum, "The airplane moves, so the simulator must move" -but intuition alone is not enough to make a valid case for requiring elaborate-and costly-motion systems for training and evaluation of airline pilots. The ultimate goal of training and checking-to produce and maintain highly-skilled pilots capable of ensuring a superior level of safety in both normal and abnormal flight operations-cannot be met without adequate resources available to all airlines world-wide. A big part of the motion debate is what resources are adequate-whether the current regulations specifying six-degree-of-freedom Stewart-motion platforms are appropriate or whether the regulations need to be modified; whether advanced-motion-system simulators, which more realistically simulate aircraft motion, are needed; or whether more flexible motion criteria opening the field for alternative motion stimulation would improve universal access to simulator training and thus benefit safety. While there has been much debate, the main issues regarding motion can be broken down into four main facets: 1) how the human perception system responds to airplane motion; 2) the limits of the hexapod-motion systems currently regulated for pilot training in accurately simulating airplane motion; 3) the opinions of aviation experts who experience the issue in the real training environment; and 4) empirical evidence on the necessity of physical motion systems for effective simulator training and checking to ensure transfer between simulator and airplane. This paper brings all of these aspects together by summarizing the literature pertinent to the simulator-motion debate. First, we discuss the extent to which humans' ability to perceive and appropriately respond to aircraft disturbances depends on visual motion, physical motion, or both. Second, current limitations in flight data availability for certain scenarios, as well as simulator hardware limitations, are discussed. Third, we summarize and respond to the published positions of several stakeholders. Fourth, a range of analytic and empirical work is summarized, from enhanced motion-feedback modeling to pilot-in-the-loop experiments, as well as meta-analytical work on the benefit of motion simulation on transfer of training to the airplane. This includes a synthesis of the Federal Aviation Administration/Volpe Center empirical studies to date. NomenclatureV 1 = takeoff decision speed; the minimum speed in the takeoff, following a failure of the critical engine, at which the pilot can continue the takeoff and achieve the required height above the takeoff surface within the takeoff distance V 2 = takeoff safety speed; a speed that will provide at least the gradient of climb required by the airplane certification rules with the critical engine inoperative V 1 /V 2 cut = engine failure at or above V 1 or V 2 , respectively, with continued takeo...

show abstract

Section: Empirical Worksupporting

confidence: 63%

Flight Simulator Motion Literature Pertinent to Airline-Pilot Recurrent Training and Evaluation

Burki-Cohen¹,

Sparko²,

Bellman³

2011

AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…al. 11,12 . For both studies, a decrab maneuver has been defined that enables motion cueing and pilot control behaviour analysis during lateral-directional maneuvering.…”

Section: E Experimental Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…al. 11,12 , in this experiment pilots conducted the maneuver as an active flight task in which they had manual control of the aircraft. The decrab maneuver was executed in the simulator at the maximum aircraft certified crosswind limit of 30 knots.…”

Section: E Experimental Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…al. 11,12 . Then, the subjective ratings of the pilots-flying were analysed and compared with the pilots-not-flying results.…”

Section: A Data Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…al. 11,12 and the cockpit environment was that of a fighter aircraft, a similar simulator study was conducted in the NLR's new Generic Research Aircraft Cockpit Environment (GRACE) simulator facility where pilots were asked to perform a decrab maneuver just before landing. The purpose of this study was to validate the previous experiment results, to investigate the effect of simulator yaw and sway motion on pilot performance and to analyze the effect of pilot workload on motion fidelity rating and motion perception.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Pilot Motion Perception and Control During a Simulated Decrab Maneuver

Smaili

Jansen

Naseri

et al. 2007

AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference and Exhibit

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

NLR is a leading international research centre for aerospace. Bolstered by its multidisciplinary expertise and unrivalled research facilities, NLR provides innovative and integral solutions for the complex challenges in the aerospace sector. For more information visit: www.nlr.nl NLR's activities span the full spectrum of Research Development Test & Evaluation (RDT & E). Given NLR's specialist knowledge and facilities, companies turn to NLR for validation, verification, qualification, simulation and evaluation. NLR thereby bridges the gap between research and practical applications, while working for both government and industry at home and abroad. NLR stands for practical and innovative solutions, technical expertise and a long-term design vision. This allows NLR's cutting edge technology to find its way into successful aerospace programs of OEMs, including Airbus, Embraer and Pilatus. NLR contributes to (military) programs, such as ESA's IXV re-entry vehicle, the F-35, the Apache helicopter, and European programs, including SESAR and Clean Sky 2. Founded in 1919, and employing some 650 people, NLR achieved a turnover of 71 million euros in 2016, of which three-quarters derived from contract research, and the remaining from government funds. UNCLASSIFIED EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Problem areaThe tuning of a motion system for a flight simulator is still a highly subjective, and therefore costly, process. There simply is a lack of objective evaluation criteria specifying the motion requirements for the simulation of different aircraft (transport, fighter, or rotary wing) or manoeuvres. In practice, the determination of motion cues is based on a subjective process that relies mainly on the perception of the pilot or simulator instructor. Consequently, the simulation is sub-optimal for specific motion-critical manoeuvres (such as engine failure), which negatively affects the control behaviour of the simulator pilot, and may also give rise to simulator sickness. The efforts to optimise motion cueing should be in accordance with the relevance of a manoeuvre for training purposes.Considerable progress has been achieved in the modeling of human control behaviour and motion perception to address the problem of objectively evaluating and optimising simulator motion cues. The effect and optimization of simulator lateral and yaw motion, occurring during flight critical maneuvers, is of particular interest.

show abstract

Investigation into Pilot Perception and Control During Decrab Maneuvers in Simulated Flight

Beukers

Stroosma

Pool

et al. 2010

Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anexperiment was conducted in theSIMONAResearch Simulator at Delft University of Technology to investigate the influence of sway, roll, and yaw motion cues on pilot performance, control, and motion perception during decrab maneuvers. In the experiment, six pilots were instructed to perform manual decrab maneuvers in heavy crosswind conditions with a Cessna Citation 500 model. The contributions of yaw, roll, and sway motion stimuli were varied such that their effects on objective measures and subjective ratings could be examined. The results of this experiment show that yaw motion had a positive influence on performance in terms of lateral touchdown distance from the runway centerline. Roll motion significantly decreased roll rate variations during decrab. High workload and the relatively low intensity of lateral motion cues led to the fact that pilots were unable to give consistent fidelity ratings. This result emphasizes the need for an objective and quantifiable method to determine motion fidelity for such maneuvers. Pilot models can possibly be used to further investigate the influence of different motion cues in these transient control tasks

show abstract

Simulated Decrab Maneuver: Evaluation with a Pilot Perception Model

Cited by 6 publications

References 18 publications

Flight Simulator Motion Literature Pertinent to Airline-Pilot Recurrent Training and Evaluation

Flight Simulator Motion Literature Pertinent to Airline-Pilot Recurrent Training and Evaluation

Pilot Motion Perception and Control During a Simulated Decrab Maneuver

Investigation into Pilot Perception and Control During Decrab Maneuvers in Simulated Flight

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About