China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Aircraft navigation
Published in Mike Tooley, David Wyatt, Aircraft Communications and Navigation Systems, 2017
An instrument approach comprises a series of predetermined manoeuvres by reference to the on-board navigation systems and flight instruments. Approaches are documented in hard or electronic format, informing the pilot with specific information, e.g. the transition from en route navigation to the landing, and (if the landing cannot be completed) a missed approach procedure. There are three classes of instrument approach, as defined by ICAO:non-precision approach (NPA)approach procedures vertical guidance (APV)precision approach (PA).
Flying by Feeling: Communicating Flight Envelope Protection through Haptic Feedback
Published in International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 2021
Dirk Van Baelen, M. M. (René) van Paassen, Joost Ellerbroek, David A. Abbink, Max Mulder
To evaluate this design, an experiment involving eleven Airbus pilots was conducted in the SIMONA research simulator, see Figure 3a (Van Baelen et al., 2020). It is a simulator with a full-fledged flight deck shell, over 180 degrees outside visual, a side stick on the right, rudder pedals in front, and throttle lever and flap levers to the left. Pilots were asked to manually fly two different approaches: a visual approach with elevated workload due to the procedure, and an instrument approach without outside visibility. During the visual approach, they encountered a windshear which required them to operate the aircraft move close to its limits during the recovery. In the instrument approach, ice was building on the aircraft wings, deteriorating the aerodynamic properties and resulting in the aircraft limits nearing the current state. The windshear scenario was flown in both the normal and alternate control law discussed above, the icing scenario was only flown using the alternate control due to limitations of the simulation. All pilots flew the three resulting scenarios with and without the haptic feedback system in a randomized Latin-square order.
Leverage points: insights from a field study in the air traffic control system
Published in Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 2020
Stathis Malakis, Tom Kontogiannis
During the simulator sessions, the authors observed that experts were able to detect leverage points in the scenarios and capitalised on them to devise efficient traffic planning strategies. Experts demonstrated the ability to make fine discriminations. They were able to see more in a scenario than novices by noticing subtle cues (e.g. small differences in the ground speed and the rate of descent/climb of the aircraft, potential conflict geometries between aircrafts that were far apart). As expected, expert controllers had richer internal representations of how things work (e.g. what will be the radius of the turn for a given type of at a certain speed and altitude). These representations allowed them to exploit better the leverage points and construct efficient CoAs. Additionally, experts were able to run mental simulations to refine their CoA or to understand how a scenario progresses (e.g. calculating the wind speed effect on aircraft trajectories) and they had a large repertoire of traffic patterns and de-confliction strategies. They recognised what was typical in a situation (i.e. sense of typicality) and complex patterns that needed different traffic planning and non-standard de-conflicting strategies (e.g. the cases with airmanship errors and flying a few Nautical miles off the centre line of an airway). They were also able to recognise when things were not going as expected, that is, when there was an anomaly that spelled re-planning (e.g. an aircraft deviating from an ATC instruction or from an instrument approach procedure).
Understanding pilot response to flight safety events using categorisation theory
Published in Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 2019
Systems do not always fail close to cognitive reference points. Pilots are not always able to use clear concepts to interpret and respond to flight safety events. A mismanaged go-around in a Boeing 757-200 (AAIB 2014a) demonstrates the alarm case in Table 2. A go-around is a manoeuvre flown to discontinue an approach to land, and involves applying high power whilst changing the flight path to an upward trajectory. The crew were conducting an instrument approach, with landing gear and flaps extended, approximately 1250 feet above the ground, when they were instructed to go-around. The Captain disengaged the automatic thrust control, applied maximum power, but left the autopilot engaged in the programmed landing trajectory. Shortly after, with the speed increasing rapidly, the Captain disconnected the autopilot and manually flew the aircraft into a climb. The aircraft subsequently deviated from its cleared altitude and experienced two flap speed exceedances, which could cause structural damage to the aircraft. The crew mismanaged the flap malfunction and its response protocol, but later landed safely.