2002 Flt Simulation Review

7/31/2019 2002 Flt Simulation Review

1/44

Flight Simulation Year in Review

FY 02


2/44

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK


3/44

FOREWORD

Aviation Systems DivisionNASA Ames Research Center Moffett Field, California 94035

25 September 2002

This is the Fiscal Year 2002 Annual Report for NASA Ames

FutureFlight Central (FFC), theCrew Vehicle Systems ResearchFacility (CVSRF), and the

Vertical Motion Simulation (VMS)Complex. It is intended to report

the more signi cant events of FY 02 and includes an Executive

Summary with comments onfuture plans, the FY 02 SimulationSchedule, performance summaries

of investigations conductedduring the year, and a summary

of Research and TechnologyUpgrade Projects.


4/44

4 Aviation Systems Division

Acknowledgments

About the Cover

Front cover: Simulations from each of the three SimLabs facilities are depicted on this years cover.

l FutureFlight Centrals Surface Management System (SMS) study is shown at the far left. This was thesecond SMS simulation, and it further evaluated the SMS concept; it also tested the combined functionalityof SMS with the Traf c Management Advisor (TMA). Details can be found on p. 30.

l The center image was created by Ken Lindsay (NASA NeuroEngineering Lab) and is from the CrewVehicle Systems Research Facilitys (CVSRF) second study of the Integrated Vehicle ModelingEnvironment (IVME). IVME provides a exible simulation architecture that allows CVSRF to conductsimulations with a variety of aircraft models on one simulator, the Advanced Concepts Flight Simulator.More information about this project can be found on p. 27.

l The picture on the far right shows test pilot Ron Gerdes (Northrop Grumman Information Technology)during the Polhemus Head Tracker Project, conducted at the Vertical Motion Simulator (VMS). Thisproject successfully determined the viability of using a magnetic head tracking system in aninterchangeable cab operating in the electromechanical environment of the VMS. Details about this studymay be found on p. 37.

Back cover: The three facilities that constitute SimLabs are capable of fully integrated simulations for abroad spectrum of aerospace research. All three labs have conducted studies relating to different aspects of commercial transport vehicles, similar to the G-2 aircraft (Dave Carothers, Northrop Grumman InformationTechnology) depicted here.

Special thanks to Tom Alderete, Dave Astill, Deborah Ballinger, Jim Blount, Dave Carothers, Girish Chachad,Paul Chaplin, William Chung, Bill Cleveland, Steve Cowart, Nancy Dorighi, Dean Giovannetti, Scott Malsom,Joanna Martin, Joe Mastroieni, Julie Mikula, Terry Rager, Kathleen Starmer, Barry Sullivan, and Nancy Tucker

for contributions made to the production of this report.


5/44

Table of Contents

Foreword ............................................................................................................................... 3

Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. 7FY 02 Simulation Schedule ................................................................................................... 9FY 02 Project Summaries.................................................................................................... 10

FFC Project Summaries ...................................................................................................... 13Surface Management System: Second Simulation........................................................ 14Kennedy Space Center Tower and Console .................................................................. 15Human-Operated Robotic Science Evaluation .............................................................. 16

CVSRF Project Summaries................................................................................................. 17Generalized Predictive Control for Recon gurable Flight Control ................................. 18

Aircraft Hazard Table Development for Turbulence Prediction and Warning Systems .. 19Distributed Air-Ground Demonstration 2002 .................................................................. 20C-17 Neural Flight Control System ................................................................................ 21FAA Motion..................................................................................................................... 22Integrated Vehicle Modeling Environment Development II ............................................ 23

VMS Project Summaries ..................................................................................................... 25Comanche Helmet-Mounted Display (HMD) Simulation ................................................ 26Boeing Advanced Theater Transport (ATT).................................................................... 27Space Shuttle Vehicle 2002-1........................................................................................ 28Modern Turbulence ........................................................................................................ 29National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)............................................................... 30

Virtual Flight Rapid Integration Test Environment IV...................................................... 31Research & Technology Projects......................................................................................... 33

Virtual Airspace Simulation Technology (VAST)............................................................. 34Virtual Laboratory (VLAB) .............................................................................................. 35VMS Digital Motion Control Unit .................................................................................... 36Polhemus Head Tracking System (PHTS) Motion Study ............................................... 37CVSRF Air Traf c Control Laboratory Upgrade ............................................................. 38

Acronyms............................................................................................................................. 39 Appendix: Description of Simulation Facilities..................................................................... 42


6/44

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK


7/44

Aviation Systems Division 7

Executive Summary

IntroductionThe staff of the NASA Ames Simulation Laboratories is proud to present the Annual

Report for Fiscal Year 2002. This report documents the Simulation Experiments and

Research and Technology Projects accomplished in three major research and test facili-ties located at the NASA Ames Research Center: FutureFlight Central (FFC), the CrewVehicle Systems Research Facility (CVSRF), and the Vertical Motion Simulator (VMS).The year was highly productive, and the staff--teamed with researchers from aroundthe world--successfully accomplished a broad range of aerospace technology researchexperiments. The scope of research was focused on crucial topics of importance, such asaerospace transportation safety, air transportation system capacity, innovative informationtechnology applications, and the development of advanced aerospace vehicle concepts.

The Aviation Systems Division is responsible for the suite of Simulation Laboratories(SimLabs) at NASAs Ames Research Center. Within the Division, the Aerospace Simu-lation Operations Branch manages and operates the facilities, the Simulation PlanningOf ce performs the business development functions, and Northrop Grumman InformationTechnology (IT) performs support tasks as a NASA contractor. With this premier suite of facilities and expert staff, Ames has the capability for high delity simulation of all ele-ments of aerospace vehicle and transportation systems, including airport ground opera-tions, air traf c management, crew station issues, crew/vehicle interfaces, vehicle design,dynamics, and handling qualities. Throughout the year, the SimLabs staff has operated allof the facilities with the highest level of safety, consistently excellent quality, and dedica-tion to customer satisfaction. We continue to work with our customers and research part-ners from government, industry, and academia, to nd ways to improve SimLabs opera-tion and ef ciency and to meet the challenges of future research and economic trends.

Key Activities in Fiscal Year 2002l FutureFlight Central is an air traf c control/air traf c management test facilityfeaturing a 360-degree, full-scale visual simulation of an airport environment asviewed from within the control tower. The control tower interior space accommodatesa full compliment of air traf c controllers and airport operations personnel. This facilityserves as an excellent tool to solve current operational issues at airports, as well asto explore new and exciting concepts for the future. With the Surface ManagementSystem (SMS) Project, FFC played a key role, providing the research team with arealistic working environment, essential to designing and integrating a useful decisionsupport tool for managing airport traf c. After six days of testing in FutureFlightCentral, preliminary results indicated the SMS has the potential to be an effective tool.l The Crew Vehicle Systems Research Facility features very high delity, fullmission, motion-based ight simulation capabilities. There are two hexapod motionbase simulator cockpit systems in the CVSRF: a B747-400, FAA Level D certi edsimulator, and the Advanced Concepts Flight Simulator. Additionally, a full-featuredair traf c control (ATC) simulation facility is integrated with each of these simulators.

A signi cant simulation in FY 02 was in support of research that integrated the NeuralFlight Control System (NFCS) with the Integrated Vehicle Modeling Environment/C-17 aircraft model. Simulated ight tests were conducted to document the airplanescharacteristics and evaluate its handling qualities in normal and failure modes. TheNFCS noticeably improved the ight of the aircraft when impaired by failed controlsurfaces.


8/44


l The Vertical Motion Simulator is a complex of simulation capabilities which includesve interchangeable, recon gurable cockpits, three large multi-channel visual

systems, and the worlds largest amplitude motion cueing system. An Air Force/BoeingTeam utilized the unique capabilities of the VMS to develop ight control systemcon gurations and landing requirements for the Advanced Theater Transport (ATT)

project. ATT is an aircraft concept designed for Super-Short Take Off and Landing(SSTOL) operation. This advanced vehicle concept features tilting wings and notail surfaces. The simulation met all the research objectives and also generatedconsiderable information for design analysis and evaluation. Test pilots and engineerswere favorably impressed with the important role that large motion cueing played inevaluating the SSTOL class of aircraft.l The SimLabs staff made signi cant progress in the initial stages of the Virtual

Airspace Simulation Technology Real-Time (VAST-RT) Project, which will interconnectsimulation facilities anywhere in an open architecture and is being demonstrated withthe simulators in the Aviation Systems Division. Speci cally, the purpose of VAST-RT is to develop real-time simulation tools for exploring new air traf c managementtechnologies that will facilitate an increase in air traf c and ground capacity whilesimultaneously improving safety and ef ciency. The team utilized FY 02 to ascertainand formulate the preliminary Project requirements. This culminated in a successfulPreliminary Design Review and delivery of a Preliminary System Design Document.

Looking Ahead to Fiscal Year 2003SimLabs will begin what is expected to be a long and exciting partnership with the

Lockheed Martin Company to develop and conduct Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) simulations.Over the last few years, SimLabs worked with both Lockheed Martin and Boeing duringthe JSF Concept Demonstrator Aircraft phase. We will now work with Lockheed Martin onthe Engineering , Manufacturing, and Development phases, assisting in their study of theaircrafts Short Take Off/Vertical Landing (STOVL) characteristics.

SimLabs is reinvigorating a fruitful partnership with the National Transportation SafetyBoard (NTSB), assisting the NTSB in accident investigation work. As the understandingof accident causes and causal factors improves, the emphasis in investigations is shift-ing from nal-factor analysis to a forensic approach, which holds promise to yield greater bene ts to the safety of the aviation system.

Another long-term effort that has been gaining momentum is the VAST-RT activity, anelement of the Virtual Airspace Modeling and Simulation (VAMS) Project. The planningand design effort mentioned above will continue into FY 03, and the work of implement-ing the various designs and plans will also get underway. The emphasis will shift fromrequirements de nition and preliminary design to building a series of simulations. TheVAST design, integrated with existing facilities, will demonstrate the projects capabilitiesin a series of simulations scheduled in FY 03-04.

What Can Be Found in This Annual ReportThe rst section contains the FY 02 Simulation Schedule and Project Summaries.

The following sections provide information about the simulation Projects completed inFFC, CVSRF, and the VMS, as well as the Research and Technology Upgrade Projects.Finally, the reader will nd a list of acronyms used throughout the report and an appendixcontaining facility descriptions.

Tom AldereteChief, Simulation Planning Of ce

Aviation Systems Division

Barry SullivanChief, Aerospace Simulation

Operations Branch Aviation Systems Division


9/44


A e r o s p a c e

S i m u

l a t i o n

O p e r a

t i o n s

B r a n c h

A v i a

t i o n S

y s t e m s

D i v i s i o n

A m e s

R e s e a r c

h C e n

t e r

F Y 0 2 S i m u

l a t i o n

S c h e

d u

l e

V M S L E G E N D :

C o m a n c h e

H M D =

C o m a n c h e

H e

l m e

t - M o u n

t e d D i s p l a y

A T T =

A d v a n c e

d T h e a

t e r

T r a n s p o r t

S S V =

S p a c e

S h u

t t l e V e

h i c l e

M o

d e r n

T u r b =

M o

d e r n

T u r b u

l e n c e

N T S B =

N a

t i o n a

l T r a n s p o r t a

t i o n

S a

f e t y B o a r d

V F - R

I T E =

V i r t u a

l F l i g h t R a p

i d I n t e g r a

t i o n

T e s

t E n v i r o n m e n

t

C V S

R F L E G E N D :

G P C =

G e n e r a

l i z e

d P r e

d i c t i v e

C o n

t r o

l

H a z a r d

T a b l e =

A i r c r a

f t H a z a r d

T a b l e D e v e

l o p m e n

t

D A G =

D i s t r i b u

t e d A i r - G r o u n

d D e m o n s t r a

t i o n

N F C S

/ C - 1

7 =

C - 1

7 N e u r a

l F l i g h t C o n

t r o

l S y s

t e m

I V M E 2 =

I n t e g r a

t e d V e

h i c l e M o

d e

l i n g

E n v i r o n m e n

t

F F C L E G E N D :

S M S =

S u r f a c e

M a n a g e m e n

t S y s

t e m

K S C =

K e n n e

d y

S p a c e

C e n

t e r

R o

b o

t i c S c i e n c e = H

u m a n - O p e r a

t e d R o

b o

t i c S c i e n c e


10/44


FY 02 Project Summaries

Continued next page...

FFC Simulation Projects

1. Surface Management System: SecondSimulation

Date: Jan 10 - Jan 17, 2002Purpose: To further evaluate the effectivenessof a decision-support tool which will aid inmanagement of airport surface traf c and toinvestigate its combined functionality with theTraf c Management Advisor tool.

2. Kennedy Space Center Tower and ConsoleDate: Jun 18 - Jun 20, 2002Purpose: To validate optimum tower location,height, and interior layout for the new controltower planned for Kennedy Space Center.

3. Human-Operated Robotic Science EvaluationDate: Jul 22 - Jul 26, 2002Purpose: To help develop methods for remoteexploration of distant locations.

CVSRF Simulation Projects

1. Generalized Predictive Control for Recon gurable Flight Control

Date: Nov 05 - Nov 25, 2001 (ACFS)Purpose: To compare the Generalized PredictiveControl System with the Neural Flight ControlSystem for recon gurable control of a damagedaircraft.

2. Aircraft Hazard Table Development for Turbulence Prediction and Warning SystemsDate: Dec 03 - Dec 17, 2001 (B747)Purpose: To generate data to aid in thedevelopment of a hazard table for four-engine,heavy transport aircraft.

3. Distributed Air-Ground Demonstration 2002Dates: Jan 14 - Jan 19, 2002; Jun 24 - Jun 28,2002;Sep 09 - Oct 04, 2002 (ACFS)Purpose: To examine interactions betweenairborne ight crew and ground-based air traf ccontrollers, with speci c emphasis on humanfactors.

4. C-17 Neural Flight Control SystemDate: Apr 08 - Apr 26, 2002 (ACFS)Purpose: To integrate the Neural Flight ControlSystem of the ACFS with the Integrated VehicleModeling Environment of the C-17 model anddocument handling characteristics under normaland failure conditions.

5. FAA MotionDate: Apr 08 - Jun 01, 2002 (B747)Purpose: To investigate the effects of simulator motion cueing in airline pilot transfer of training.

6. Integrated Vehicle Modeling EnvironmentDevelopment IIDate: Aug 05 - Aug 23, 2002 (ACFS)

Purpose: To provide a exible architecture in the ACFS to simulate various aircraft models, withspeci c focus on the Boeing C-17 model.

FBFixed-Base SimulatorsVMSVertical Motion Simulator

ACFSAdvanced Concepts Flight Simulator B747Boeing 747 Simulator


11/44


VMS Simulation Projects

1. Comanche Helmet-Mounted Display (HMD)Simulation

Date: Jan 14 - Feb 22, 2002 (FB) Aircraft type: RAH-66 Comanche helicopter Purpose: To compare pilot performance usingboth new contact analog symbology andstandard compressed symbology under identical

ight scenarios.

2. Boeing Advanced Theater Transport (ATT)Date: Feb 11 - Mar 15, 2002 (VMS)

Aircraft type: ATT 187-202 transportPurpose: To examine control system guidelinesand landing requirements for the ATT aircraft.

3. Space Shuttle Vehicle 2002-1Date: Mar 25 - Apr 19, 2002 (VMS)

Aircraft type: Space Shuttle Orbiter Purpose: To maintain concurrence withupgraded Orbiter software and provide the pilotastronaut corps with training in Orbiter landingand rollout.

4. Modern TurbulenceDate: Jul 08 - Aug 08, 2002 (VMS)

Aircraft type: UH-60A Black Hawk helicopter Purpose: To evaluate a new rotorcraft turbulencemodel and examine new control laws whichcould assist pilots when ying in tight quartersand under degraded visual conditions.

5. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)Date: Aug 12 - Aug 23, 2002 (VMS)

Aircraft type: Commercial transportPurpose: To assist the NTSB with futuretransport accident investigations.

6. Virtual Flight Rapid Integration TestEnvironment IVDate: Sep 03 - Sep 27, 2002 (VMS)

Aircraft type: CTV8Purpose: To merge advanced InformationTechnologies to facilitate ight simulation as anintegral part of the vehicle design process.

FY 02 Project Summaries

Research & Technology Projects

1. Virtual Airspace Simulation Technology Real-Time (VAST-RT)

Purpose: To develop real-time simulationtools for exploring new air traf c managementtechnologies that will facilitate an increase in air traf c and ground capacity while simultaneouslyimproving safety and ef ciency.

2. Virtual Laboratory (VLAB)Purpose: To enhance and deploy a collaborativeengineering tool for researchers to interact inreal-time with VMS experiments from variousremote locations.

3. VMS Digital Motion Control UnitPurpose: To replace the VMSs analog-basedMotion Control Unit (MCU) with a modernprogrammable digital MCU.

4. Polhemus Head Tracking System (PHTS)Motion StudyPurpose: To determine the viability of using a magnetic head tracking system inan Interchangeable CAB operating in theelectromechanical environment of the VMS.

5. Air Traf c Control Lab UpgradePurpose: To integrate PC-based systems in theCVSRF while increasing simulation capabilitiesand reducing maintenance costs.


12/44



13/44


FutureFlight Central provides capabilities for research in Air Traf c Control and human fac-tors via large-scale simulations. The two-storyfacility offers a 360-degree, full-scale, real-timesimulation of an airport, where controllers, pilots,and airport personnel can interact to optimizeoperating procedures and test new technologies.

FutureFlight CentralResearch Facility

NASA FutureFlight Central is a national Air Traf cControl/Air Traf c Management test facility dedicatedto solving the present and emerging capacity problemsof the nations airports. The facility was designed in col-laboration with the Air Transportation Association, theFederal Aviation Administration, the National Air Traf cControllers Association, and the Supervisors' Committee.

FFCPROJECT

SUMMARIES


14/44


Surface Management System: Second SimulationDeborah Walton, Mike Madson, Marlene Hooten, Boris Rabin, Ken Christensen, Betty Silva,Stephen Atkins, NASA ARC; Chris Brinton, Metron; Susan Lockwood, Seagull Technologies;

Jim Hitt, Booz-Allen Hamilton; Farid Haddad, Jim McClenahen, Raytheon;Chris Murphy, Claudine Herbelin, Northrop Grumman Information Technology (IT)

varying conditions and to evaluate their perception of SMSs performance. During the other three experi-mental days, three conditions were tested: baseline,SMS alone, and SMS with TMA. Each hour-longscenario was based on actual traf c observed atDFW. The SMS display format was the same for allcontroller positions.

FutureFlight Centrals simulation software deliv-ered real-time aircraft updates (including aircraft ID,aircraft type, latitude, longitude, altitude, climb rate,on-ground/airborne status, heading, ground speed,and simulation time) to the SMS. A High Level Archi-tecture (HLA) interface transferred the necessaryinformation to the SMS software.Results

Interoperability between SMS and TMA was suc-cessfully demonstrated. Speci cally, cooperativemanagement of arrivals and departures, by usingTMA and SMS information together, maximized theuse of runways, taxiways, and gates, and thus mini-mized delays. Additionally, several key observationswere made regarding procedures and preferences of local and ground controllers and TMCs.

Stephen Atkins, NASAs Project Lead for SMS,noted, We learned a tremendous amountabouthow controllers assign departures to runways,sequence departures, and select taxi routes, andhow SMS can better help tower controllers performthese tasks.

Investigative TeamNASA Ames Research Center (ARC)MetronSeagull TechnologiesBooz-Allen HamiltonNorthrop Grumman ITRaytheon

SummaryThe Surface Management System (SMS) is a

decision-support tool that will help controllers andair carriers manage airport surface traf c. The goalof this second simulation was to further evaluatethe SMS concept and performance, and to test thecombined functionality of SMS with another tool, theTraf c Management Advisor (TMA).Introduction

NASA Ames Research Centers Advanced Air Transportation Technologies (AATT) Project, incooperation with the FAA, is studying automation for aiding surface traf c management at major airportfacilities. The SMS is an enhanced decision-supporttool that will help controllers and airlines manageaircraft surface traf c at busy airports, thus improvingsafety, capacity, ef ciency, and exibility.

NASAs goal is to transfer SMS to the FAA byDecember 2003, for deployment in the Free FlightPhase 2 program to modernize the National Air Space through the introduction of new technologiesand procedures. The rst SMS simulation (Septem-ber 2001) evaluated the effectiveness of SMS alone.The second simulations goal was twofold: to test thecombined functionalities of SMS and TMA, and tofurther evaluate the SMS concept and performance.

TMA, currently in use at the Fort Worth Center,is one of the Center-TRACON (Terminal Radar

Approach Control) Automation System tools. Itassists TRACON and Center traf c managementcoordinators (TMCs) in arrival ow managementplanning. SMS helps tower controllers and TMCsmanage departures. The successful linking of SMSsdeparture management and TMAs arrival manage-ment may improve the overall ef ciency of an airport.Simulation

The east side of Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport (DFW) served as the test bed for the simula-

tion study. Five certi ed professional controllers fromthe DFW tower, including a TMC and a supervisor,participated in the simulation, controlling simulatedaircraft from the east tower. Two other tower control-lers from Memphis and Norfolk, VA, airports, as wellas representatives from several air carriers observedportions of the simulation and provided additionalfeedback.

Three of the experiments six days were dedi-cated to interviewing the controllers in order to better understand how controllers managed traf c under

Controllers managing DFW east side traf c inFutureFlight Central, with SMS displays visible.


15/44


Kennedy Space Center Tower and ConsoleDr. Dawn Elliott, NASA Kennedy Space Center; Ken Christensen, Mike Madson,

Boris Rabin, Betty Silva, NASA ARC; Doug Ernest, Northrop Grumman IT

Summary A new air traf c control tower is planned for the

Kennedy Space Center Shuttle Landing Facility(SLF). This tower will improve safety and ef ciencyof operations during Space Shuttle landings. Future-Flight Central developed a virtual model of the newtower so that the design could be evaluated by users,thus validating an optimum tower position and interior cab con guration before beginning construction.Introduction

Located at Cape Canaveral, Florida, and speciallydesigned for landing NASA Space Shuttle Orbiters,the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Shuttle LandingFacility rst opened for ights in 1976. Recently, KSChas planned a more modern control tower that willmake Shuttle operations safer and more ef cient.

FutureFlight created a virtual model of the SLFso that KSC could evaluate design choices beforebeginning construction on the new tower. The simula-tion objectives were to:

l validate the selected location and height of theproposed tower;

l obtain the most usable tower interior design byemploying human factors analysis; and

l check for visual obstructions at various tower heights.

Simulation

FutureFlight staff developed the 3D model usedto create the out-of-the-window view of KSC. Theday scene featured vegetation lining the runwaysand swampy areas; the night scene depicted runwaylights and xenon searchlights, thus virtually mirroringthe actual environment. FutureFlight also added theOrbiter, the Shuttle carrier, and unique ground sup-port vehicles as new models for this simulation. Other typical KSC aircraft which were modeled includedT-38s, G-2s, 747s, and helicopters.

KSC controllers, using the new tower locationsview, were able to evaluate three prospective interior tower cab con gurations under varying visibility andweather conditions while virtual aircraft took off andlanded. In addition, various tower heights and loca-tions were tested.Results

FutureFlight successfully met KSCs requirementsfor the simulation of its new tower: the tower locationwas con rmed, various bush and tree obstructionswere noted for future abatement, and an optimuminterior tower design was selected. Additionally,the simulation allowed controllers to interact withtheir new workplace and learn how to operate withincreased safety and ef ciency in the new environ-ment.

Ed Taff, NASA Shuttle Launch Facility Opera-tions Manager, noted: FutureFlight Central is aunique NASA capability. It will optimize the workingenvironment...and offer future safety training opportu-nities. We are fortunate to have this facility availableto us as we start our new tower. Dr. Dawn Elliott,KSC Principal Investigator, added, To conduct atrue assessment, it is important to be able to closelyreplicate the workplacehere lies the strength of thissimulator.

In FY 2003, KSC is planning several training simu-lations, taking advantage of the already-created SLF

visual database and unique aircraft models at NASA Ames. In this way, controllers can be trained virtuallyin preparation for Orbiter landings.

Investigative TeamNASA Kennedy Space Center NASA ARCNorthrop Grumman IT

The virtual Space Shuttle Orbiter lands in full view in theFutureFlight Central tower.


16/44


of the local geological features, providing a basis for further eld exploration.

Return of the data from the remote sites was acomplex task involving the Ames Mobile ExplorationSystem computing and wireless communicationsinfrastructure and a satellite link jointly provided bySimon Fraser University and the CommunicationResearch Centre of Canada. Once the digital imagesreached FutureFlight Central, they were uploadedto its supercomputer, SGIs Onyx 2 Reality Monster.

A script was written to detect new images, makenecessary modi cations, and then, in near real-time,display them in the 360-degree visual system.

To complete the experiment, a geologist in theeld, wearing a spacesuit prototype, surveyed the

same sites visited by the eld staff on ATVs.

ResultsDetailed results are pending. However, One thing

is already clear, said Principal Investigator GeoffreyBriggs, Our science team found that the panoramicperspective of FutureFlight Central provided themwith excellent situational awareness. Based onobservational studies in the tower cab, improvementsto the software may include more navigational, imageprocessing, and rock/soil sample cataloging tools.

This research demonstrated an alternative use of FutureFlight Centrals visual display system. Further-more, the ability of the facility to receive and displayremote-sensing data represents a building blocktowards a potential future in which real air traf c con-

trol could be enhanced using virtual technology.Investigative TeamNASA ARCUniversity of Tennessee

Auburn UniversitySETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) InstituteSimon Fraser UniversityTitanQSS Group, Inc.Foothill Community College District (FCCD)Northrop Grumman IT

Human-Operated Robotic Science EvaluationBrian Glass, Geoff Briggs, Richard Alena, Kelly Snook, Mike Madson, NASA ARC; Jeff Moersch, University

of Tennessee; Jim Saunders, Auburn University; Virginia Gulick, SETI; Stephen Braham, Simon Fraser University; Jen Jasper, Titan; Lori Blaauw, QSS Group, Inc; Samantha Domville,

Victor Rundquist, FCCD; Claudine Herbelin, Northrop Grumman IT

One of many panoramic images transmitted from theCanadian High Arctic for display in FutureFlight Central.

Summary

Emulating remote science on Mars, eld staff fromthe Human-Operated Robotic Science EvaluationProject transmitted live panoramic images from theCanadian Arctic to FutureFlight Centrals 360-degreetower screens. The research team studied thedegree to which reducing communications time delaybetween controllers and robotic rovers could increasescienti c productivity of remote exploration on Marssurface.Introduction

Since 1997, geologists and biologists from theHaughton-Mars Project have been studying theHaughton Crater located on Devon Island in theCanadian High Arctic. Researchers have chosen thissite because it is an unusually good Mars analog:a well-preserved meteorite impact crater in a frigid,glaciated region with thick underlying permafrost.The conditions there approximate those of the Marsenvironment at present or earlier in its history.

Future Mars exploration will be carried out byrobots controlled from Earth, and the minimum two-way communication delay between Earth and remoterobots will be many minutes. When human explora-tion of Mars begins, crews will operate with muchfaster communications between themselves andtheir robotic rovers. As part of the effort to prepare for eventual Mars exploration, the project team studiedthe degree to which reducing communications timedelay between controllers and robots could increasethe productivity of remote exploration on Mars sur-face.

To accomplish this goal, eld staff transmitted livepanoramic images from the Canadian High Arcticto FutureFlight Centrals 360-degree tower screens,thus connecting by satellite the eld team withgeologists in FutureFlights 360-degree eld-of-viewsimulator.Experiment

Researchers compared three conditions: base-line data collected by a geologist in the eld lastyear; remotely-obtained data; and time-limited data,emulating what might be obtained by a human in aspacesuit prototype. The all-terrain vehicles (ATVs)in the eld were operated by humans obeying remotecommands; this mimicked the action of roboticrovers. The scientists at Ames, using written instruc-tions, directed the movement of the ATVs in order to collect panoramic, standard, and close-up digitalviews. Each remote image increased understanding


17/44


Crew Vehicle SystemsResearch Facility

The Crew Vehicle Systems Research Facility, aunique national research resource, was designed for

the study of human factors in aviation safety. The facilityanalyzes performance characteristics of ight crews, formu-

lates principles and design criteria for future aviation environ-ments, evaluates new and contemporary air traf c control procedures, and develops new training andsimulation techniques required by the continued technical evolution of ight systems.

Studies have shown that human error plays a part in 60 to 80 percent of all aviation accidents. The CrewVehicle Systems Research Facility allows scientists to study how errors are made, as well as the effects of automation, advanced instrumentation, and other factors, such as fatigue, on human performance in air-craft. The facility includes two ight simulators, an FAA certi ed Level D Boeing 747-400 and an AdvancedConcepts Flight Simulator, as well as a simulated Air Traf c Control System. Both ight simulators arecapable of full-mission simulation.

CVSRFPROJECT

SUMMARIES


18/44


Generalized Predictive Control for Recon gurable Flight ControlDon Soloway, Karen Gundy-Burlet, Krishna Kumar, NASA ARC;

Don Bryant, Ramesh Panda, David Brown, Northrup Grumman IT

SummaryThe purpose of this study was to compare the

Neural Flight Control System (NFCS) design with thenon-adaptive Generalized Predictive Control (GPC)system design for recon gurable control of a dam-aged aircraft. Preliminary results showed that theGPC system performed as well as the NFCS.Introduction

NFCSs are processing systems that do not requireexplicitly de ned characteristics relating input tooutput; rather, they are capable of learning the rela-tionship between input to a system and the resultingoutput by analysis of desired system behavior. In theFall of 2000, the Integrated Neural Flight PropulsionControl System (INFPCS) experiment was conductedto examine the effectiveness of NFCS as a means of controlling a damaged aircraft.

GPC uses predictive control schemes that arebased on a general model of how an aircraft willrespond. In this scheme, the predictive controller works with reference inputs (the pilots control inputs)and calculates necessary changes to the aircraft con-trol surface positions; this achieves a correspondingreference trajectory that ful lls the intent of the pilotscontrol input. By focusing on the reference trajectorycalled for by pilot input, the effects of modeling errors,over-and under-parameterization, sensor noise,system response lags and any effects of aircraftdamage are overcome.

This experiment was a follow-on to the INFPCS

study. The goal of this study was to investigate analternative approach to NFCS capable of automati-cally compensating for aircraft damage or failures.Such a development could reduce the costs associ-ated with ight control law development. Speci cally,researchers used this experiment to compare NFCSand GPC under various failure conditions and also toexamine the handling qualities of both controllers.Simulation

The Advanced Concepts Flight Simulator (ACFS)was used as the test platform. The ACFS simulatesa Boeing 757-class generic commercial air transportwith a wide body, a T-tail, low wings, and twin turbo-fan engines located beneath the wings.

The tests performed consisted of selected ightmaneuvers as well as approach and landing sce-narios. The performance of three different controllerswas evaluated under normal ight and simulatedfailure conditions. An additional control authority wasdeveloped using symmetric ailerons for pitch control.Simulated failures included frozen ight control sur-faces and a failed engine.

Evaluation criteria was based on handling qualityratings for pitch and roll acquisition tasks, ne track-ing tasks, and approach and landing tasks. Audio andvideo recordings were made of the test runs, and aspeci ed set of data was collected using the simula-tors built-in data collection system.Results

Seventy test runs were own by NASA test pilotsover a three-day period. GPC and NFCS were com-pared both with and without adaptation. These initialtests show the GPC to be as powerful as an adaptivesystem and suggest that a non-adaptive controller can work as well as an adaptive controller.

Investigative TeamNASA ARCNorthrop Grumman IT

View of ACFS cockpit and displays.


19/44


Aircraft Hazard Table Development for Turbulence Prediction andWarning Systems

James Watson, NASA LaRC; Terry Rager, NASA ARC;Paul Robinson, Roland Bowles, Bill Buck, AeroTech Research (USA), Inc.;

Diane Carpenter, Jerry Jones, Jim Miller, Charlie Ross, Ghislain Saillant, Northrop Grumman IT

SummaryResearchers generated data to aid in the develop-

ment of a hazard table for four-engine, heavy trans-port aircraft. The hazard table will subsequently beused in conjunction with turbulence detection sys-tems to decrease in-air, turbulence-related accidents.Introduction

Federal Aviation Administration data show thatturbulence is the primary cause of in- ight injuries innon-fatal accidents. Furthermore, while turbulencealone doesnt cause crashes, it can set off a cascadeof events that ultimately lead to disaster. To addressthe problem of in- ight turbulence, NASA has estab-lished a Turbulence Element under the AviationSafety Program. As part of its mission, the Turbu-lence Element mandates the development of a tur-bulence warning system. To function effectively, thissystem will require hazard tables for different classesof aircraft. These hazard tables will ultimately workin concert with turbulence detection systems topredict the stresses on aircraft in a given turbulencescenario. Turbulence that is predicted to generateg-loads in excess of safe limits will be avoided bypilots in ight; conversely, pilots will be able to savetime by not avoiding areas of turbulence predicted togenerate acceptable g-loads. SimLabs is helping toful ll Turbulence Element requirements by supplyingdata for the development of a hazard table for thefour-engine, heavy transport class of aircraft usingits 747-400 Level D simulator.Simulation

Simulations were performed for 144 different tur-bulence scenarios generated by a turbulence spectralmodel. The scenarios depicted turbulence that wasconsidered likely to be encountered during normaloperation of a 747-400. Several variables, includingvertical acceleration response of the 747-400 to windgusts (Figure 1), the aircrafts inboard elevator angle,

and the pitch and roll of the aircraft body were mea-sured. Data and pilot comments were collected, andcalculations were performed to estimate hazard tablevalues.

ResultsData for the 144 test conditions were successfully

collected. The information generated in this study willbe used in conjunction with performance character-istics, altitude, true airspeed, and vehicle weight todetermine hazard tables for individual aircraft typesand ful ll a critical requirement of the Turbulence Ele-ment of NASAs Aviation Safety Program.

Investigative TeamNASA Langley Research Center (LaRC)NASA ARC

AeroTech Research (USA), Inc.Northrop Grumman IT

Figure 1. Vertical acceleration response of a 747-400 to astep gust input.


20/44


Distributed Air-Ground Demonstration 2002Richard Mogford, Sandy Lozito, Everett Palmer, Vernol Battiste, Walter Johnson, Nancy Smith, Terry Rager,

NASA ARC; Mietek Steglinski, Steglinski Engineering; Thomas Prevot, San Jose State Univ.; Robert Cornell,David Brown, Dave Darling, Ramesh Panda, Gary Uyehara, Dan Wilkins, Ron Lehmer, Joel Rosado, Burnett

Lee, Mike Izrailov, Marty Pethtel, Tom Crawford, Northrop Grumman IT

SummaryDistributed Air-Ground (DAG) research examines

interactions between the airborne ight crew andground-based air traf c controllers. A controller facilityand several separate locations of simulated pilotedaircraft were linked to create the air traf c environ-ment. This simulation demonstrated technologies andprocedures related to DAG concepts in the AdvancedConcepts Flight Simulator (ACFS).Introduction

Distributed Air-Ground research is a part of the Advanced Air Transportation Technologies (AATT)Project. It explores three aspects of the National

Airspace System: the ight deck, the Air Traf c Con-trol (ATC) environment, and dispatch. This researchfocuses on human factors.

As part of the research, demonstrations wereconducted during January, June, and September of 2002. Each demonstration built upon the previ-ous one. The goal was to integrate and demonstrateincremental improvements in the DAG system. Bylinking the ACFS and the Airspace Operations Labo-ratory (AOL), pilots and controllers were able to useDAG tools in real-time simulation scenarios.

SimulationSimLabs development effort focused on the ACFS. Cockpit Display of Traf c Information (CDTI),a key element of DAG research, was integrated intothe ACFS. The CDTI, developed separately by theDAG research team, consisted of display graphicsand both self-separation and con ict logic. All ele-ments were hosted on a Windows PC. Two PCs wereused to drive the captains and rst of cers displays.The CDTI display graphics were video switched intothe Navigation Display (ND) locations in the ACFS

cockpit. The CDTI computers were interfaced to the ACFS host simulation via the Aeronautical Datalinkand Radar System (ADRS). The ADRS, in turn,acted as a gateway to the simulated air traf c andthe Center and Terminal Radar Approach Control(TRACON) environments remotely located in the

AOL.The ACFS integrated new versions of CDTI and

ADRS as they evolved. For the June demo, ADRSwas integrated into the most current ACFS con gu-ration. Changes were also made to the ight man-agement system of the ACFS to accommodate newdatalink messages and to improve vertical navigation(VNAV) performance.

A separate project team was created to improvethe communications link between the Crew VehicleSystems Research Facility (CVSRF) and the AOL.Previous experiments reported severe echo feedbackand voice clipping when using Voice Over InternetProtocol to connect the CVSRF audio system withthe AOL audio system. The team was able to iden-tify and correct a number of hardware problems, aswell as create a new radio model for the ACFS ASTisystem; this resulted in a reliable connection for an

ACFS VHF radio with multiple controller stations inthe AOL.

The ACFS was linked to the AOL for the demon-stration runs. The AOL provided the simulated air traf c and the Center and TRACON controllers. Flightcrews ew the ACFS during the scenarios employingDAG tools. The CDTI airborne logic was used in theCenter environment to self-separate traf c con icts.Self-spacing speed algorithms developed by NASALangley were available in the Approach phase of

ight to examine increased traf c ow.The Crew Activity Tracking System was integrated

into the setup and used to collect data for the nal

demonstration in September. Data was also collectedwith the ACFS built-in data collection system.Results

The ACFSs DAG system was successfullyimproved with each demonstration. The audiosystem became more robust with the incorporatedimprovements which were made throughout the year.Research results are pending.

Investigative TeamNASA ARCSteglinski Engineering

CDTI display during a traf c alert.


21/44


to select, modify, and execute all failures and restore

the aircraft to a non-failed state. These includedthe capability to fail aps independently, as well assymmetrically, and to fail the rudder in the reversecondition relative to pilot input. The EOS Malfunc-tions Page was enhanced to add the newly createdfailures. A new Aircraft Set Page was also created onthe EOS to adjust cargo and fuel weights as well asthe center of gravity of the airplane model.Results

Audio responses of the pilot were recorded, aswas video of the out-the-window visual display andselected aircraft cockpit instrumentation. Time his-tories collected by the ACFS data collection systemincluded pilot inputs, failure modes, and aircraftdynamics, such as, weight, inertia, control surfaceposition, and engine performance. Parameters of interest to the intelligent ight control system werealso recorded for further analysis.

The integration of the NFCS controller with theC-17 aircraft model was successful. The controller noticeably improved the ight characteristics of theaircraft in the presence of failed surfaces. This effortwill facilitate future research on the application of theNFCS to the C-17 model and lay the groundwork for recon gurable control design applications on a joint

Air Force/NASA C-17 research aircraft.Investigative Team

NASA ARCNorthrop Grumman ITQSS Group, Inc.

C-17 Neural Flight Control SystemKaren Gundy-Burlet, Krishna Kumar, Craig Pires, NASA ARC;

Dan Renfroe, Bob Cornell, Ramesh Panda, David Brown, David Darling, Northrop Grumman IT;Don Bryant, Greg Limes, QSS Group, Inc.

NFCS experiment control page.

SummaryThe Neural Flight Control System (NFCS), previ-

ously developed on the Advanced Concepts FlightSimulator (ACFS), was integrated with the C-17aircraft model installed using the Integrated VehicleModeling Environment (IVME) architecture. Simu-lated ight tests were conducted to document theairplanes characteristics and evaluate its handlingqualities in normal and abnormal modes. The NFCSnoticeably improved the controllability of the aircraftwhen impaired by failed control surfaces.Introduction

In the wake of recent commercial airliner acci-dents, NASA is pursuing the development of intel-ligent ight control systems that will allow alterna-tive control of aircraft should the primary systemsmalfunction or fail. The C-17 cargo transport wasselected as the model system for use in these devel-opments, and a representative C-17 model was inte-grated into the ACFS adaptive architecture in 2001.

This experiment was a follow-up study to theIntegrated Neural Flight Propulsion Control System(INFPCS) experiment conducted during the previ-ous scal year. The goal of this simulation was tointegrate the existing ACFS damage-adaptive controlsystems with the C-17 model and then document thehandling characteristics under normal and abnormalconditions.Simulation

The ACFS was used as the test platform. The sim-ulation model was a wide-body, y-by-wire C-17 mili-tary transport. The aircraft has a four-engine, high-wing, T-tail con guration. Simulated failure conditionsconsisted of ight control surface failures (e.g., selectactuators becoming jammed at a xed position) andaircraft damage modeled as shifts in the center-of-gravity. NASA test pilots evaluated handling qualities(using Cooper-Harper ratings) during select maneu-vers and approach and landing scenarios. Audio andvideo recordings were made of the test runs, and

data were collected using the simulators built-in datacollection system.Several new capabilities were added to the

ACFS. The lower Engine Indication and Crew Alert-ing System displays Surface Position Indicator was changed to toggle between the C-17 and the

Advanced Concepts Transport (default aircraft model)aircraft con gurations, displaying the appropriatenumber of surfaces for the selected aircraft. Addi-tionally, the Experiment Operator Station (EOS) wasenhanced to allow the IVME C-17 experiment page


22/44


FAA MotionJudith Burki-Cohen, Yongki Go, DOT Volpe Center; Dave Astill, NASA ARC;

William Chung, Jerry Jones, Charlie Ross, Dan Renfroe, Dave Lambert, Ghislain Saillant,Diane Carpenter, Jim Miller, Norm Gray, Tom Standifur, Northrop Grumman IT

Summary

This study was part of a joint program by NASA,the Department of Transportation (DOT) VolpeCenter, and the FAA to use the B747-400 Level D

ight simulator to investigate motion cueing effects intransfer of training.Introduction

The FAA is considering a requirement that willmandate simulator use for all airline pilot training,testing, and checking. Researchers conducted thisexperiment to investigate whether the effects of motion aid transfer of training. A previous FAA experi-ment concluded that platform motion did not havean effect on transfer of training for the maneuverstested, but concerns were raised on the quality of the motion cues provided by the test simulator. Thisexperiments objective was to eliminate these con-cerns by using the NASA Ames FAA Level D-certi edB747-400 simulator, with the simulator adjusted toprovide more responsive motion cues. Two groupsof B747-400 pilots ew scenarios designed with thespeci c intent of revealing a difference between theeffects of motion and no motion.Simulation

The experiment procedure was comprised of threephases: evaluation, training, and transfer testing. Allthree phases contained maneuvers chosen from theFAA practical test standards. Four speci c maneu-vers were selected which, due to their nature, mayreveal the effect of motion: V1 Cut, V2 Cut, PrecisionInstrument Approach, and Sidestep with a VerticalUpset. V1 Cut and V2 Cut involve one-engine failureduring take off; Precision Instrument Approach andSidestep are approach and landing tasks.

Test runs were own by ight crews consisting of either a Captain or First Of cer and a non- ying staff pilot. Half of the subjects went through training withthe motion system turned on, and the other half weretrained without motion. The two subject groups then

ew a nal phase with motion on to compare thetraining effects. Statistical analyses were developedto study a speci c subset of parameters in the sub-

jects performance and workload.

ResultsForty current and quali ed airline pilots partici-

pated in the study, and over 600 runs were recorded.The data for the experiments are being analyzed,and results are pending.

Investigative TeamDOT Volpe Center NASA ARCNorthrop Grumman IT

The NASA Ames B747 Level D ight simulator is shownabove. The motion actuator drive equations were tuned touse the full range of actuator extension.


23/44


Integrated Vehicle Modeling Environment Development IIKaren Gundy-Burlet, Craig Pires, Kalmanje Krishnakumar, Terry Rager, NASA ARC;

Robert Cornell, David Brown, David Darling, David Lambert, Ramesh Panda, Northrop Grumman IT; DonBryant, Gregory Limes, QSS Group, Inc.

Summary

The Integrated Vehicle Modeling Environment(IVME) provides a exible software architecture to the

Advanced Concepts Flight Simulator (ACFS) whichallows for a choice of aircraft models in simulationexperiments. The Boeing C-17 aircraft model is thefocus of the current research. Data from this projectwill support the continued integration of a neural ightcontroller into the ACFS.Introduction

The IVME architecture was implemented in the ACFS primarily to support Intelligent Flight Control(IFC) research goals. IFC research requires thecapability to integrate and test neural ight controlschemes for a variety of civil and military aircraft.

During the initial IVME development effort in FiscalYear 2001, the ACFS was converted to a exible,multi-airframe simulation architecture, allowing the

ACFS to simulate a Boeing C-17 transport aircraft inaddition to the original B757-class Advanced Con-cepts Transport (ACT). In the second part of thisongoing IVME development, additional improvementswere made to both the simulation infrastructure andthe C-17 computer models to support the integrationof a neural ight controller into the ACFS.Simulation

The ACFS/ACT is a full-mission simulation, repre-sentative of a generic B757-class of passenger trans-port aircraft. It has state-of-the-art avionics, includingsimulated ight displays and a Flight ManagementSystem. The ACFS/C-17 simulation has its own basicaerodynamics, ight controls, engines, and groundhandling models, but it uses generic ACFS simula-tion components in cases where the C-17-speci ccomponents are not provided (e.g., avionics).

In support of this study, further improvements weremade to the C-17s aerodynamics, ight controls, andengine models. This was done to meet the delityrequirements for the various normal and failure mode

conditions necessary for integrated tests with theneural ight controller. Requirements include the abil-ity to fail individual control surfaces with associatedaerodynamic effects and implementation of engineseizure malfunctions.

In addition, the default auto throttle controller wasmodi ed to work with the C-17 model. Flight deck dis-plays, including the Head-Up Display, were modi ed

to provide added functionality and symbology moreclosely depicting C-17 data. The experiment scenariocontrol and aircraft con guration set pages in theExperimenter Operator Station were also tailored for the C-17 and experiment-speci c functionality.

The side stick and pedal control force character-istics were completely redesigned to provide desir-able handling qualities for ACT operations, as well asmeet the C-17-speci c requirements. In the case of the C-17, the control rates in pitch, roll, and yaw werematched with US Air Force Acceptance Test Guide(ATG) data for the aircraft.

A signi cant emphasis was placed on modelveri cation by setting up and running C-17/ATG testcases. These tests included take off and landing,pitch, roll and yaw response characteristics. Addi-tional tests to verify engine acceleration, decelera-tion, and gear change dynamics were also gener-ated.Results

Development for this activity was completed in August 2002. Piloted runs are tentatively scheduledfor FY 03.

Investigative TeamNASA ARCNorthrop Grumman ITQSS Group, Inc.

ACFS/C-17 Surface Position display.


24/44



25/44


Vertical Motion Simulator Research Facility

The Vertical Motion Simulator Complex is a world-class researchand development facility offeringunparalleled capabilities for conductingsome of the most exciting andchallenging aerospace studies andexperiments. The six-degree-of-freedom VMS, with its 60-foot verticaland 40-foot lateral motion capability,is the world's largest motion-basesimulator. The large amplitude motionsystem of the VMS was designedto aid in research issues relatingto controls, guidance, displays,automation, and handling qualities of existing or proposed aircraft. It is anexcellent tool for investigating issuesrelevant to nap-of-the-earth ight,landing and rollout studies, VerticalTake Off and Landing (VTOL), ShortTake Off/Vertical Landing (STOVL),and Super-Short Take Off and Landing(SSTOL).

VMSPROJECT

SUMMARIES


26/44


HMD, collect and display data for the ight tasks,and provide guidance symbology to the pilot on theHMD. SimLabs developed real-time graphics for theComanche and Apache symbologies, lab data dis-plays, static map, and Comanche ight instruments.Sikorsky drive laws for the Comanche symbologywere integrated into the graphics program, and drivelaws were coded for the Apache symbology. The newmagnetic head tracker and HMD system were inte-grated and tested thoroughly prior to simulation use.For additional information, please refer to the Pol-hemus Head Tracking System (PHTS) Motion Studyelsewhere in this report.Results

Seven pilots used the HMD with the two differentsymbologies to y the simulated Comanche helicop-ter. The experiment was successful, completing 866data runs and accomplishing all objectives.

Results of the investigation, in terms of per-formance, handling qualities, workload, and pilotcomments, produced results for which the numericaldifferences between the two symbologies were smalland the symbology sets yielded categorically similar data. This simulation is the rst step of a series of evaluations which will be increasingly operationally-relevant in context.Investigative TeamU.S. ArmyTurpin TechnologiesSan Jose State University FoundationNorthrup Grumman IT

Comanche Helmet-Mounted Display (HMD) Simulation Adolph Atencio and R. Jay Shively, US Army; Terry Turpin, Turpin Technologies;

Susan Dowell, San Jose State University Foundation; Robert Morrison, Chuck Perry,Estela Hernandez, Shelley Larocca, Russ Sansom, Dan Wilkins, Northrup Grumman IT

Summary

This purpose of this simulation was to compareperformance of the Comanche ight symbology withthat of the Apache symbology. Emphasis was placedon the differences in heading tapes and horizon lines.This simulation is considered a rst step in a series of symbology evaluations.Introduction

The Comanche is the U.S. Armys next generationscout and attack helicopter and the cornerstone of the Armys Force XXI Aviation Modernization Plan.The Comanche makes use of the latest advance-ments in technology, including a binocular HMDknown as the Helmet Integrated Display SightingSystem (HIDSS). The HIDSS will serve as the pilotsprimary ight display and uses newly-developed sym-bology designed to meet the demands of ying theaircraft in all weather and lighting conditions.

Preliminary tests of the Comanche HMD symbol-ogy by Army test pilots revealed issues regardingthe HIDSSs new symbology presentation style. Thesimulations conducted at the Vertical Motion Simula-tor (VMS) addressed these concerns by comparingpilot performance using both the new Comanchecontact analog symbology (wherein symbols appear to overlay the real-world objects they represent) andthe standard Apache compressed symbology under identical ight scenarios.Simulation

The principal objectives of the simulation were tostudy the Comanche implementation of the headingtape, address issues associated with its implementa-tion, and assess symbology usability. To conduct theevaluation, each pilot ew the simulated Comanchewhile wearing the Comanche helmet upon which asensor was mounted for tracking head movement.The pilot used the Comanche symbology to y sev-eral runs and perform assigned ight tasks. For allruns, the helicopters automatic ight control system

and forward-looking infrared visual system wereused. The pilot then repeated the same runs usingthe Apache symbology.

To prepare for the simulation, SimLabs personnelmodi ed an RAH-66 simulation model (previouslydeveloped at NASA ARC) to implement and vali-date Boeings latest ight control system. Engineersdeveloped software to use head tracker informa-tion to drive the visual scene and symbology on the

Pilots were shown an out-the-window view similar to thisone while participating in the simulation.


27/44


Boeing Advanced Theater Transport (ATT)Ken Rossitto, Edmond Field, Todd Williams, The Boeing Company;

James Franklin, Chad Frost, NASA ARC; Gordon Hardy, Philip Tung,Emily Lewis, Steve Belsley, Joe Ogwell, Ron Gerdes, Northrop Grumman IT

Summary

The ATT is an aircraft concept designed for Super-Short Take Off and Landing (SSTOL) operation. TheBoeing ATT 187-202 model used for this experimentwas a tilt-wing design with four propellers attached bynacelles to the leading edge of the main wing. Thisstudy investigated ight control system con gurationsand landing requirements. The ATT simulation modelwas developed entirely with Matlab/Simulink Com-mercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) software.Introduction

Military operations are increasingly taking placein austere settings; consequently, there is a grow-ing need for transports that can travel long distance,carry sizeable payloads, and operate on short, unpre-pared runways. The ATT is a next-generation militarytactical transport that could serve as a replacementfor the aging C-130 eet. Using an ATT model thatwas developed entirely with off-the-shelf software,researchers designed the simulation to providecontrol system guidelines and to determine landingrequirements for the new aircraft.

SimulationThe Boeing ATT 187-202 model was used for

this experiment. It is a tilt-wing con guration withfour propellers attached by nacelles to the leadingedge of the main wing. Critical design factors for this

aircraft include the control authority, control actuationrates, and control response types required to performSSTOL operations in demanding weather conditions.Current information comes from Short Take Off andLanding (STOL) ight and simulation experiencecollected over three decades ago, and it relates toaircraft con gurations with conventional aerodynamicsurfaces, mechanical controls, simple rate damper type stability augmentation systems and primitiveinstrument displays. Consequently, the rst stage of the simulation focused on obtaining pilots evaluation

for a range of control response type characteristicsand levels of static longitudinal and directional stabil-ity speci c to the ATT. The modern designs employedin this simulation made full use of digital y-by-wirecontrols and electronic displays, and the basic aero-dynamic con guration tended toward relaxed staticstability with minimal or no tail surfaces.

The second stage of the simulation concentratedon landing performance. SSTOL operations requiringhigh precision landing touchdowns have generallyused a no- are technique to minimize longitudinaltouchdown dispersions. However, the resulting hightouchdown sink rates impose signi cant weight,volume, and complexity penalties on landing gear design. The use of a full or partial landing are wasinvestigated as a means of increasing touchdownaccuracy. Additionally, the effect of a high precision

ared landing on pilot workload was investigated.Simulations were conducted for a total of ve

weeks on the motion base. In preparation for theexperiments, two weeks of xed-base simulationswere performed to validate the simulation systemresponse and nalize ight tasks and scenarios.

Boeing supplied the ATT Simulink block diagrams,and VMS personnel converted the diagrams to Ccode by using a COTS real-time code generator.This reduced both simulation development time andcosts to the customer. Ames-developed Head-Upand Head-Down Displays (from previous simulations)were integrated with the real-time C code and VMSreal-time FORTRAN structure. Additionally, a newvisual database was built and used for this study.Results

The simulation met all the research objectivesand also generated considerable data for designanalysis and evaluation. Test pilots and engineerswere favorably impressed with the important role thatlarge motion cueing played in evaluating the SSTOL

class of aircraft. They were also impressed with theef ciency of VMS personnel and their ability to builda new simulation from scratch. The proprietary natureof this project precludes the inclusion of detailedresults in this report. For more information, refer to the web page http://www.boeing.com/phantom/att.html.

Investigative TeamThe Boeing Company - Phantom WorksNASA ARCNorthrup Grumman IT

The ATT features a tilt-wing con guration.


28/44


SummarySimulations of the Space Shuttle Orbiter were

performed at the Vertical Motion Simulator (VMS) toprovide landing and rollout training for the astronautcorps. Upgrades were made to the math model toincrease its delity.Introduction

The Space Shuttle Orbiter is simulated every ninemonths at the VMS. Researchers have examinedissues such as modi cations to the ight-controlsystem, ight rules, and the basic simulation model.The simulations also provide astronaut training withrealistic landing and rollout scenarios.Simulation

Training was provided for upcoming mission crewsthrough a series of ights. Various runways, visibil-ity conditions, and wind conditions were simulated,and system failures were periodically introduced.The math model was enhanced by including thelatest software upgrades to the Head-Down Displays(HDD), a wind estimation indicator on a HDD, a newoption for the speedbrake logic, the ability to induceHead-Up Display (HUD) symbology misalignment,and additional wind pro les. Two end-of-run data dis-plays were also redesigned to provide more informa-tion to both the crew and the researchers.

Some pilots ew a demonstration of Transoceanic Abort Landing (TAL) sites with reduced landing aides.Combinations of the Ball-Bar, HUD, and the Precision

Approach Path Indicator lights were disabled for thedemonstration. Pilots were asked to rate the dif cultyin landing under such conditions in an effort to deter-mine the impact on mission safety.

Modi cations to the Head-Down MultifunctionElectronic Display Subsystem were made to con-form to the latest upgrades in the Orbiter. Changingdisplay colors and some data units have increased

Space Shuttle Vehicle 2002-1Howard Law, Greg C. Johnson, Chris Ferguson, George Zamka, Ron Garan, NASA JSC;

Ed Digon, Boeing North American; Peter Dailey, Lockheed Martin; Jim Harder, United Space Alliance; Jeff Homan, Estela Hernandez, Northrop Grumman IT

Space Shuttle landings are simulated every nine monthsat the VMS.

display readability and consistency to better assist

the crew in landing. An on-board wind estimator was implemented.

Winds during the nal phase of entry directly affectenergy conditions while ying around the Heading

Alignment Cone (HAC) and at touchdown. Currently,no onboard information regarding wind magnitudeand direction is available to the crew. The crewsevaluated the wind estimator for potential implemen-tation on the actual Orbiter.

The speedbrake model was updated to includechanges made to the Shuttles software. A new short-

eld speedbrake option for runways less than 8500feet long was added. This option allows the Orbiter to touch down at slower speeds to stop safely whenusing shorter runways. This capability is importantin an abort situation where the available runway isshorter than nominal.

Researchers also requested the capability toinduce a HUD misalignment, because this occurredduring one of the actual Shuttle ights. Modi cationsto the code were made to simulate a hardware mis-alignment of 0.5 degrees in azimuth on the HUD.

Finally, the STS-108 actual ight wind pro le wasreproduced in the simulation and own by the crewduring their training.Results

During the four weeks of the simulation, thirty-eightpilots ew 779 training runs. Ten mission specialistsalso received training in the jumpseat. All objectiveswere met for the four-week training. Based upon pilotcomments, the crew familiarization phase reinforcedthe importance of the VMS in preparing upcomingcrews for the landing and rollout phase of the missionand for possible failures during that phase.

All math model upgrades were successfully veri-ed for future use. The TAL Landing Aides Demon-

stration was completed with two pilots ying 40 dataruns. Based on the data and pilot ratings, research-

ers have concluded that the model at the VMS isready for a full study of reduced landing aides in thefuture.

Investigative TeamNASA Johnson Space Center (JSC)Boeing North AmericanLockheed Martin Engineering and Services Corp.United Space AllianceNorthrop Grumman IT


29/44


The turbulence data were extracted to generate a set

of transfer functions representing the gusts.During the GEM testing, pilots ew the matrix of

four turbulence levels with both head and cross-winds, hovering in front of the CGS for two minutes.Data and pilot comments were used to assess therealism and validity of the GEM model. For compari-son, equivalent runs were completed using SORBET.

Sikorskys Modern Control Laws (MCLAW) weredelivered in Matlab Simulink diagrams which wereused to generate model code. An interface wasdeveloped so that Sikorsky variables could bechanged and monitored in real-time. The task matrixwas comprised of ve maneuvers (depart/abort,hover, lateral reposition, pirouette, and vertical) andincluded ights with the MCLAWs and the baselineUH-60 SAS. Each task was own with a daytimescene, as well as at night with night vision goggles.Time-history data, pilot comments, and Cooper-Harper handling quality ratings were recorded toevaluate the effectiveness of the new SAS.Results

Six pilots performed 569 data runs. Pilots reportedthat the GEM turbulence was very realistic. Withthese promising results, the researchers are pursuingimplementing the GEM model on the RASCAL heli-copter. The Sikorskys MCLAWs showed an overallimprovement in handling qualities for all pilots andall maneuvers. Pilot comments were favorable, also,when ying in the degraded visual environment.

Investigative TeamUS Army (AFDD)Sikorsky Aircraft CorporationNorthrop Grumman IT

Modern TurbulenceChris Blanken, Jeff Lusardi, US Army; Vineet Sahasrabudhe, Sikorsky; Steve Belsley, Pat Burnside, Estela

Hernandez, Emily Lewis, Northrop Grumman IT

When wind ows around a large structure, such as ahangar, turbulent air ow is created.

SummaryThe Modern Turbulence program was a helicopter

handling qualities simulation focusing on turbulencemodeling for rotorcraft and modern control laws for the UH-60 Black Hawk. A new turbulence modeland advanced Stability Augmentation System (SAS)control laws were implemented. Along with collec-tive tactile cueing, the control laws were tested for improving handling qualities and reducing workloadin a degraded visual environment.Introduction

Typically, turbulence models have been basedon xed-wing aircraft and are not valid near hover.Therefore, helicopter handling quality testing con-sidering the effects of turbulence is challenging. The

Army Aero ightdynamics Directorate (AFDD) of theUS Army Aviation and Missile Command developeda new technique--the Gust Extraction to Mixer (GEM)transfer function--to extract the gust characteristicsfrom helicopter ight test data. A gust model gener-ated from this method for a hovering UH-60 wasused in this study.

The control system for the current eet of BlackHawks was designed for daytime ight in good visualconditions. However, the capability is now neededto y in tight quarters and at night when the visualcues, which pilots need for stabilization, are greatlyreduced. Augmentation of the SAS can compensatefor loss of these visual cues. The AFDD, in supportof a National Rotorcraft Technology Center program,tasked Sikorsky to design an improved SAS. TheModern Turbulence experiment is one step towardsputting these modern control laws onto the UH-60Mversion of the Black Hawk.Simulation

In this experiment, researchers used the Gen HelBlack Hawk with the baseline UH-60 SAS and theestablished SORBET turbulence model developedby SimLabs. The rst phase of the experiment testedthe GEM turbulence model. The second phase

evaluated Sikorskys modern control laws. A number of improvements were made to the graphics to addrealism to the out-the-window scenes. A new modelof the San Francisco Coast Guard Station was cre-ated, and the delity of the Moffett Field databasewas increased. Several new task targets were built,and the task performance displays were optimizedthrough several revisions.

Before the simulation, ight test data were takenat the Coast Guard Station (CGS) at San Francisco

Airport using the building as a turbulence generator.


30/44


National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)Bart Elias, Kris Poland, John OCallaghan, National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB);

Estela Hernandez, Bob Morrison, Greg Davis, Bill Chung, Northrop Grumman IT

Summary An evaluation of the Vertical Motion Simulators

(VMS) simulation cueing capability was conducted

to determine if the VMS could provide the neededdelity to meet future NTSB accident investigation

requirements.Introduction

To aid the NTSB in aircraft accident investigations,a simulation facility that can recreate the extreme

ight conditions experienced in accidents with a highdegree of delity would certainly be bene cial. TheVMS has the worlds largest vertical motion systemand modular architecture, and, as such, has thepotential to become a credible asset for the NTSBwhen investigating human-in-the-loop issues relatedto accidents.Simulation

Three speci c simulation capabilities--motioncueing, visual cueing, and aural cueing--were evalu-ated by the NTSB during this effort. In addition, thecapability to reproduce control loader characteristicswas also tested to check the compliance of givenspeci cations.

The VMSs motion drive algorithms were adjustedto reproduce the pilot station acceleration cues expe-rienced under extreme ight conditions. All six-axismotion travels in the VMS, including the large verticaland lateral travels, were fully utilized to achieve maxi-mum possible motion sensations. The accelerations produced by the VMS matched the NTSB-provided

time traces very well.Various graphic displays, including instrument

displays, data displays, and out-the-window visualscenes, were tested to ensure that the VMS hadthe resources and exibility to meet NTSB-speci edvisual cueing and data display requirements. Rep-resentative ight test runs were conducted to checkand validate the data collection, display, and analysisprocedures. A closed audio network was also devel-oped to connect the simulator cockpit and investi-gator stations, thereby ensuring the security levelrequired by the NTSB.

Results All NTSB-speci ed cueing requirements were met.Based on NTSB investigators comments, the NTSBwas pleased with the capabilities and performance of the VMS.

Investigative TeamNational Transportation Safety BoardNorthrop Grumman IT

The VMS s interchangeable cabs have a full range of motion capabilities.

An example of a simulated aircraft subjected to theextreme ight conditions of a steep angle.


31/44


Virtual Flight Rapid Integration Test Environment IVMary Livingston, Jorge Bardina, Susan Cliff, David Kinney, Mark Tischler, Julie Mikula, NASA ARC; Chun

Tang, Veronica Hawke, ELORET Corp.; John Bunnell, Joe Ogwell, Jeff Homan, Dan Wilkins, Russ Sansom,Northrop Grumman IT; Kenny Cheung, Sean Swei, Raytheon

SummaryThe objective of the Virtual Flight Rapid Integration

Test Environment (VF-RITE) project is to producesystems and infrastructure to facilitate the use of aerodynamic data [developed using ComputationalFluid Dynamics (CFD) technology] and other Infor-mation Technology (IT) tools in a real-time, piloted

ight simulation. VF-RITE IV continued to improvethe RITE process while studying a new version of theSlender Hypersonic Aerodynamic Research Probe(SHARP) Crew Transfer Vehicle (CTV) developed atNASA Ames.Introduction

The objective of the VF-RITE project is to producesystems and infrastructure to facilitate the use of aerodynamic data developed using CFD technologyand IT tools in a real-time, piloted ight simulation.The subjective and objective ight simulation data willallow the design team to apply return knowledgefrom the simulation to improve vehicle performance.

The VF-RITE project is multi-phased. The rstphase united separate aerodynamic disciplines toestablish the infrastructure for rapid integration of CFD data into ight simulation. The second phaseinvolved redesign of the Space Shuttles nose for back-to-back comparison of cases with differentgeometries and the application of return knowledgeto the design team. The third phase applied the ITtools developed during the rst two phases to thepreliminary design of a SHARP CTV. Speci cally,RITE III compared newer designs for a SHARP CTVwith the previously designed HL-20 and the SpaceShuttle Orbiter. This fourth phase studied the latestSHARP concept vehicle, with the goals of improvingthe ight controls and Head-Up Display and of further improving the RITE process itself.Simulation

A SHARP CTV geometry was designed, and abaseline aerodynamic model was developed usingCFD methods. The ight control system used the

architecture developed in RITE III and incorporatedimprovements derived from previous pilot comments.The control gains were calculated using a controlsystem optimization tool. In addition to the Rota-tional Hand Controllers (RHCs) currently found inthe Space Shuttle, the simulator was equipped withsidestick controllers. Additionally, the CTVs HUD wasmodi ed to behave more like the Shuttles.

Upon completion of the development process, theCTVs stability, control, and handling qualities wereevaluated through real-time piloted simulation in the

Vertical Motion Simulator. Astronaut-pilots ew threedifferent approach and landing tasks: a straight-inapproach with no wind; a lateral offset approach withno wind; and a straight-in, 20-kt wind scenario.

The simulation included various options for chang-ing the aerodynamic performance of the CTV in order to assess the potential for design improvements. Therapid development of a failure mode control recon-

guration was also demonstrated.During the simulation, Virtual Laboratory (VLAB)

was used to allow remote participation by research-ers at other facilities. The use of VLAB helped facili-tate real-time system analysis between the multipledisciplines at different sites.Results

Design modi cations to the SHARP CTV weresuccessfully accomplished using the VF-RITE pro-cess. This was done via software changes relating tothe geometry, aerodynamic characteristics, and con-trol systems of the vehicle. Modi cations were madein support of design and systems analyses to investi-gate a wide range of lifting body vehicle designs andapproach procedures. Tools were utilized to enablerapid changes to the control system and vehicleparameters.

Astronaut-pilots gave Cooper-Harper ratings of thevarious iteration of the simulated vehicles, providinginput for modi cations to the vehicles and feedback

to the designers. This feedback impacted the designsof the control system architectures, landing gear location, determination of speed-brake gearing, andvehicle lift-over-drag studies. A preliminary controlinceptor study was also completed during the courseof this simulation.

Investigative TeamNASA ARCELORET CorporationNorthrop Grumman ITRaytheon

The SHARP CTV8.


32/44



33/44


State-of-the-ArtSimulation Facilities

Providing advanced flight simulation capabilitiesrequires continual modernization. To keep pace withevolving customer needs, SimLabs strives to optimizethe simulation systems, from cockpits to computersto technology for real-time networking with ightsimulators and laboratories in remote locations.

RESEARCH & TECHNOLOGYPROJECTS


34/44


Virtual Airspace Simulation Technology Real-Time (VAST-RT)

SummaryThe VAST-RT Project was established to help

create air traf c management technologies thatwill facilitate an increase in air traf c capacity whilesimultaneously increasing safety and ef ciency.VAST-RT completed a major milestone in August2002 with the delivery of the Preliminary DesignReview; a preliminary System Description Documentwas subsequently delivered in September. The major thrust for this Project now turns from requirementsgathering and design to constructing the operationalcode through a series of releases and simulations.Introduction

The capacity of the nations air transportationsystem continues to increase, and according to someanalysts, is expected to double over the next tenyears. Consequently, much work is being conductedto develop and eld new decision-support tools withthe goal of improving the air traf c management(ATM) system. These tools, however, are projectedto provide only incremental improvements to todays

ATM system. In order to meet the demands of thefuture, revolutionary technologies must be developedto meet the envisioned growth. NASA, working withthe Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), academia,and industry, is currently developing a new researchprogram which will create air traf c managementtechnologies that facilitate the doubling of capacitywhile simultaneously increasing safety and ef ciency.Much of the preliminary work in this area will beconducted under a new project, the Virtual AirspaceModeling and Simulation (VAMS) Project.Project Description

One of the critical elements of the VAMS Project isthe establishment of a new virtual airspace modelingand simulation capability for evaluating ATM conceptsat both the systems and local levels with the requisitedegrees of delity. This new capability will examinecritical core component technologies and candidatesystem level concepts and architectures to meet the

requirements of the air transportation system of thefuture. The goal of this new capability is to provide asafe, cost-effective, common, exible, and accessibleplatform for evaluating human performance issuesrelated to the development and implementation of future ATM concepts.

The VAST capability consists of two elements: anon-real-time modeling and simulation capability anda real-time, human-in-the-loop simulation capabil-ity. The non-real-time system focuses on the devel-

opment and validation of models and methods for

non-real-time assessments of candidate operationalconcepts. Efforts within this element will produce asuite of tools composed of interoperable models rep-resenting the gate-to-gate actions and highly coupledinteractions of the key components of the air transpor-tation system. Results and models from the non-real-time element will be applied to VAST-RT.

The VAST real-time simulation will provide a gate-to-gate, national-airspace-wide, human-in-the-loopsimulation capability for the assessment of humaninteractions with airspace operational concepts andtheir supporting technologies. The real-time simula-tion will ensure that adequate and credible real-timemodels and necessary interfaces to human-in-the-loop laboratories and simulators are available toperform high- delity human performance and humanfactors studies to better understand human/systeminteractions. VAST will provide a national-airspace-wide closed-loop environment where decisionsmade at the local level propagate to the system leveland vice versa. VAST will also enhance and expandcurrent human-in-the-loop simulation capabilities,making them more exible and extensible.

Accomplishments and PlansThe VAST-RT Team has completed the require-

ments de nition phase of the Project and has deliv-ered the Preliminary System Description Document(SDD) to the Project Of ce. The SDD provides theProject Of ce and the user community with therequirements and preliminary design for the VAST-RT product as well as providing theory of operationsinstructions and other supporting documentation. TheProject emphasis will now shift to producing the itemsdescribed in the SDD and to producing simulations.VAST-RT will produce four simulations in FY 03 usingall of the NASA SimLabs facilities. At the completionof each simulation, the VAST-RT Team will have dem-onstrated a new set of tools and will have provided

the Project Of ce with a new capability for use inselecting and evaluating the air traf c management/air traf c control concepts of the future.

Development TeamScott Malsom, Bill Cleveland, John Grif n, SteveCowart, NASA ARC; Rod Ketchum, FAA; LeightonQuon, Ron Lehmer, Carla Ingram, Marty Pethtel,Ernie Inn, Paul Chaplin, Bill Chung, NorthropGrumman IT


35/44


Virtual Laboratory (VLAB)

SummaryVLAB is a suite of tools that extends the real-time

ight simulation engineering and research capabilities

of the Vertical Motion Simulator (VMS) beyond thephysical boundaries of the laboratory and onto theremote users de

Documents

2002 Flt Simulation Review