Flight Simulation Year in Review FY99

Flight SimulationYear in Review

FY99

Foreword

Aviation Systems Research,Technology, & Simulation Division

NASA Ames Research CenterMoffett Field, California 94035

10 December 1999

This document is the Fiscal Year1999 Annual Performance Summary ofthe NASA Ames Vertical Motion Simula-tion (VMS) Complex and the CrewVehicle Systems Research Facility(CVSRF). It is intended to report to ourcustomers and management on themore significant events of FY99. Whatfollows are an Executive Summary withcomments on future plans, the FY99Simulation Schedule, a projection ofsimulations to be performed in FY00,performance summaries that report onthe simulation investigations conductedduring the year, and a summary ofTechnology Upgrade Projects.

iv Aviation Systems Research, Technology, & Simulation Division

Acknowledgment

About the Cover

Front cover: The Vertical Motion Simulator plays a vital role in the ongoing development of the SpaceShuttle. The first experiment at the VMS simulated the Space Shuttle orbiter in 1981. Recently, the VMSdemonstrated its many years of contributions to the Shuttle program at the first annual Space Shuttle Devel-opment Conference, including a display of remote laboratory technology. (For more information, see pages16, 20, and 34.)

Back cover: The Advanced Concepts Flight Simulator examined a system for improving the safety andefficiency of airport surface operations in low visibility. This cockpit navigation and guidance system displaystaxi routes on both an electronic moving map and a head-up display. (For more information, see page 33.)

Special thanks to Tom Alderete, Dave Astill, Dave Carothers, Girish Chachad, William Chung, Ron Gerdes,Scott Gilliland, Jennifer Goudey, Joe King, Scott Malsom, Julie Mikula, and Terry Rager for contributionsmade to the production of this document.

Table of Contents

Foreword ............................................................................................................................. iiiExecutive Summary ............................................................................................................ 2FY99 Project Summaries..................................................................................................................6FY99 Project Summaries..................................................................................................................7FY00 VMS Simulation Projects.......................................................................................................8FY00 CVSRF Simulation Projects...................................................................................................9Vertical Motion Simulator Research Facility .................................................................. 11

Limited-Authority Stability and Control Augmentation System...........................................12Boeing B2, A3 .............................................................................................................................13Simulation Fidelity Requirements 7........................................................................................14Lockheed Martin CDA, 2, PWSC, 3........................................................................................15Space Shuttle Vehicle 1............................................................................................................16Civil Tiltrotor 8 SCAS.................................................................................................................17Helicopter Maneuver Envelope Enhancement 6..................................................................18High-Speed Civil Transport Ames 8........................................................................................19Space Shuttle Vehicle 2............................................................................................................20

Crew-Vehicle Systems Research Facility ....................................................................... 23CTAS/FMS Data Link................................................................................................................24Propulsion Controlled Aircraft Ultralite....................................................................................25Balked Landings.........................................................................................................................26Cockpit Display of Traffic Information.....................................................................................27Fatigue Feedback......................................................................................................................28Taxiway Navigation and Situation Awareness 2....................................................................29FMS Departure Procedures.....................................................................................................30AATT Integrated Tools Study/Air-Ground Integration Experiment.....................................31

Technology Upgrade Projects ......................................................................................... 33Virtual Laboratory.......................................................................................................................34Remote Development Environment........................................................................................35Rapid Integration Test Environment........................................................................................36VMS Modernization...................................................................................................................37Flight Management System Upgrade.....................................................................................38Martian Airplane Visualization..................................................................................................39Navigational Database Upgrade.............................................................................................40Air Traffic Control Upgrade.......................................................................................................41CVSRF Year 2000 Compliance Upgrades.............................................................................42

Acronyms........................................................................................................................... 44Appendix: Simulation Facilities ....................................................................................... 46

2 Aviation Systems Research, Technology, & Simulation Division

Executive Summary

This Annual Report addresses the major simulation accomplishments of the AviationSystems Research, Technology, and Simulation Division of the NASA Ames ResearchCenter. The simulation facilities, contained in two separate buildings at Ames and oper-ated by this division, consist of the Crew-Vehicle Systems Research Facility (CVSRF)and the Vertical Motion Simulation (VMS) Complex. The CVSRF is comprised of a FAAcertified Level D Boeing 747-400 simulator, the Advanced Concepts Flight Simulator(ACFS), and an Air Traffic Control (ATC) Laboratory. The VMS Complex is comprised ofthe Vertical Motion Simulator (VMS), five Interchangeable Cockpits (ICABs), and twofixed-base simulation labs. A brief description of these facilities is included in the Appen-dix.

From a management perspective, Fiscal Year 1999 was dominated by several impor-tant events. First was NASA’s continuing efforts to move towards full-cost accounting.This activity continues to lead SimLab to streamline and reduce facility operations costs.Another event was the Center’s achievement of ISO 9001 Certification. SimLab, whichwas independently certified in May 1998, began efforts towards joining the Center’s ISOCertification in November of this year. A third significant event is a SimLab organizationaltransition that is just beginning. In addition to changing the organization structure ofSimLab, the division will be renamed the Aviation Systems Division (AF). The finalmanagement and operational change has been the transition to a new PerformanceBased Contract. Logicon Information Systems & Services was awarded the contract lastyear, began transition in December 1998, and assumed full service in January. This hasinvolved a significant learning effort by all of the SimLab staff as this new contract is task-order based.

In addition to these activities, paramount to SimLab operations has been the continu-ing commitment to uncompromising excellence in the development and production ofefficient, high-fidelity, safe, real-time piloted flight simulations. SimLab has also continuedto aggressively modernize in order to maintain reliability, our competitive edge, and ourresponsiveness to users’ needs. The staff places very high value on customer relationsand has successfully provided highly responsive, cost-effective, value-added simulationsupport to all customers.

The purpose of this document is to briefly describe our accomplishments of the pastyear. Its outline includes the Executive Summary, Simulation Schedule for FY99, PlannedProjects for FY00, VMS Project Summaries, CVSRF Project Summaries, and TechnologyUpgrade Projects. The Project Summaries sections state the goal of each simulation andpresent high-level results. Researchers and pilots from NASA and private industry areidentified as well as simulation engineers from the staff. The Technology UpgradeProjects section reports changes made in order to keep our simulation facilities state-of-the-art. Finally, a List of Acronyms is included for the reader’s convenience.

Notable accomplishments for FY99 include the following:All simulation experiments conducted at Ames support significant research that is

responsive to the needs of the nation with a focus on applied aeronautics research.Diversity, fidelity, and breadth of simulation distinguish the research projects conducted atAmes, as can be seen by reviewing the Project Summaries sections of this report.

There were twenty-one major simulation experiments conducted in the flight simulationlaboratories in FY99.

Technology upgrade projects for the past year include:Projects at the CVSRF automated the process of updating many records in the ACFS

navigational databases and upgraded the ACFS Flight Management System to supportadvanced terminal approach procedures. A visual database was developed for envision-ing an aircraft's flight through the Martian atmosphere. Finally, extensive Year 2000preparation included an upgrade to the B747-400 simulator software, evaluation of twocandidate systems for upgrading the ATC Laboratory, and modernization of networkingequipment, computers, and operating systems throughout the facility.

Aviation Systems Research, Technology, & Simulation Division 3

A. David Jones

Associate Chief-SimulationsAviation Systems Research, Technology, & Simulation Division

Several VMS upgrade projects were completed or reached major milestones. TheVMS Modernization project, which will ultimately increase the reliability and performanceof the VMS, continued progressing as the preliminary engineering study and the detailedMaintenance Requirements Documentation phases were completed. Highlights of theVirtual Laboratory project include the first deployment of a desktop client that allowsresearchers to participate in VMS experiments from their own desktop computer systems,and the highly successful deployment at the Space Shuttle Development Conference. Anew Remote Development Environment was developed and delivered that promises toreduce the time and cost of developing research experiments at remote sites prior to fullVMS simulations. Also, a Rapid Integration Test Environment project developed andimplemented procedures and infrastructure to facilitate importing aeronautical data fromother research facilities into VMS simulations, enabling reduced aircraft developmentcycle time and costs.

Some future plans:All of the simulation facilities continue to be in high demand. There is a full list of

projects for FY00 that build on past research efforts and bring some new activities aswell.

VMS Plans a major upgrade, a Modernization Project, to convert from analog to digital,the VMS drive power and controls. Hands-on work is scheduled to begin in FY02. Thegoal for FY00 is completion of the design and planning phases. The VMS will upgrade itshost computer systems to meet increasing demands of our simulation customers. In turn,the real-time executive program will be upgraded to support the newer versions ofOpenVMS run on the DEC Alpha systems we will acquire. The Video Switch will beupgraded to handle ever increasing device and bandwidth requirements.

The CVSRF will continue to search for new and innovative ways to help researchersstudy the interaction of the flight crew with the aircraft and flight environment. With anupgrade to its host computer, the ACFS will join with the ATC Laboratory and 747-400simulator with increased capability to connect to others such as the VMS, the FAA TechCenter and the Future Flight Center. This interoperability with other world-class facilitiescan foster multifaceted real-world simulations maximizing the utility of each simulatorwhile optimizing time and resources.

We will continue our tradition of supporting mainstream NASA and national aeronauti-cal development programs, being second to none in state-of-the-art real-time simulationand enabling technologies. Automated tools for simulation and modeling, improvementsin graphics and displays, and efficient computational environments are other continuingefforts.

In addition, significant efforts continued in planning the VMS Modernization projectcurrently scheduled for FY02. The project will replace obsolete mechanical drives andcontrol equipment with state-of-the-art systems. When complete, the VMS will set thestandard for cost-effective, high-performance, reliable motion-base simulators.

89'tc

O89'

vo

N89'

ceD

99'naJ

99'be

F99'

raM

99'r

pA

99'ya

M99'

en

uJ99'

yluJ

99'g

uA

99't

peS

99'tc

O5

2191

622

961

3203

741

1282

411

8152

18

5122

18

5122

925

2191

623

0171

4213

741

1282

521

9162

29

6132

036

3102

724

1181

52

Sim

ulat

ion

Exp

erim

ents

Bra

nch

Avi

atio

n S

yste

ms

Res

earc

h,Te

chno

logy

, & S

imul

atio

n D

ivis

ion

Am

es R

esea

rch

Cen

ter

FY

99 S

imu

lati

on

Sch

edu

le

Sim

ulat

ion

Fac

ilitie

s

VM

SS

hift

A

ICA

B F

ixed

Bas

e

Shi

ft B

B74

7

AC

FS

Shi

ft A

Shi

ft B

AT

C


AA

TT

NA

SA

NA

SA

CTA

S/F

MS

Dat

alin

kG

TM

ST-

NA

SA

2

NA

SA

NA

SA

CD

TI

Bal

ked

Land

ing

AA

TT

PC

A

Fat

igue

Fee

dbac

k

FM

S

NA

SA

FAA

NA

SA

NA

SA

NA

SA

NA

SA

BO

EIN

G B

2LO

CK

HE

ED

SS

V 1

Sim

FR

7B

OE

ING

A

3H

elM

EE

6H

SC

T A

8LO

CK

HE

ED

LAS

CA

S

NA

SA

Boe

ing

NA

SA

NA

SA

, JS

C,

Roc

kwel

lN

AS

AN

AS

AB

oein

gN

AS

A, B

oein

g,H

oney

wel

lN

AS

A, B

oein

gA

rmy,

Hoh

NA

SA

CD

TI

NA

SA

NA

SA

Sim

FR

7B

NA

SA

Arm

y

CT

R 8

SC

AS

NA

SA

, JS

C,

Roc

kwel

l

SS

V 2

NA

SA

SS

V 2

LOC

KH

EE

D D

ev.

LOC

KH

EE

D P

WS

C

NA

SA

BO

EIN

G B

2

NA

SA

LOC

KH

EE

DP

WS

C

NA

SA

CT

R 8

SC

AS

NA

SA

Hel

ME

E 6

BO

EIN

G B

3

NA

SA

Boe

ing

HS

CT

A8

NA

SA

T-N

AS

A 2

NA

SA

NA

SA

CTA

S/F

MS

Dat

alin

k

HS

CT

A8

SS

V C

onf.

NA

SA

, JS

C,

Roc

kwel

l

RIT

E T

ES

T

NA

SA

Sim

FR

7B

.HS

R

HS

CT

A8

NA

SA

PW

SC

2C

DA

CD

A3


FY99 Project Summaries

VMS Flight Simulation Projects1. Limited-Authority Stability and ControlAugmentation System (LASCAS)Sept 24–28, Oct 5–30 (VMS)Aircraft type: UH-60 Black Hawk helicopterPurpose: To investigate a flight control systemdesigned to improve helicopter operations in de-graded visual environments.

2. Boeing B23. Boeing A3Oct 26–30, May 17–21 (FB);Nov 2–20, May 24–June 11 (VMS)Aircraft type: X-32 Joint Strike FighterPurpose: To support Boeing’s design and develop-ment of the X-32 and to advance NASA-sponsoredresearch.

4. Simulation Fidelity Requirements (SimFR) 7Mar 15–Apr 9 (VMS)Aircraft type: Generic helicopter and jetPurpose: To confirm the fidelity criteria for roll-lateralmotion in simulation and to take data for investigatingpitch-longitudinal motion.

5. Lockheed Martin CDA6. Lockheed Martin 27. Lockheed Martin PWSC8. Lockheed Martin 3Jan 4–15, Sept 13–17 (FB);Jan 11–Feb 12 , Sept 20–Oct 15 (VMS)Aircraft type: X-35 Joint Strike FighterPurpose: To support Lockheed’s design and develop-ment of the X-35 and to advance NASA-sponsoredresearch.

9. Space Shuttle Vehicle (SSV) 1Feb 15–Mar 11 (VMS)Aircraft type: Space Shuttle orbiterPurpose: To investigate control-surface rate limitsand trim switch conditions and to provide astronauttraining.

10. Civil Tiltrotor (CTR) 8 SCASApr 5–8 (FB); Apr 12–30 (VMS)Aircraft type: XV-15 tiltrotorPurpose: To evaluate two stability and control aug-mentation systems and to evaluate flight profiles fornoise abatement.

11. Helicopter Maneuver Envelope Enhancement(HelMEE) 6Apr 19–30 (FB); June 14–July 9 (VMS)Aircraft type: UH-60 Black Hawk helicopterPurpose: To investigate flight-envelope limits andtheir communication to the pilot using side-stickcontrollers.

12. High-Speed Civil Transport (HSCT) A8June 28–July 9, July 26–30 (FB); Aug 2–23 (VMS)Aircraft type: High-speed civil transportPurpose: To measure the handling qualities of thecurrent design of a supersonic passenger airplaneand to finalize flight-control standards.

13. Space Shuttle Vehicle (SSV) 2Aug 30–Sept 3, Oct 18–Nov 5 (VMS)Aircraft type: Space Shuttle orbiterPurpose: To provide training in orbiter landing androllout for astronauts and astronaut candidates.

VMS Technology Upgrades1. Virtual Lab (VLAB)Purpose: To enhance the capabilities of a system thatenables remote researchers to participate in liveexperiments at the VMS.

2. Remote Development Environment (RDE)Purpose: To create an engineering environment forresearchers to develop VMS-compatible simulationmodels at their own sites.

3. Rapid Integration Test Environment (RITE)Purpose: To develop the procedures and infrastruc-ture necessary to import aeronautical data fromresearch facilities directly into the VMS.

4. VMS ModernizationPurpose: To increase the reliability and maintainabil-ity of the VMS by replacing major system elements.


FY99 Project Summaries

FB—Fixed-Base SimulatorsVMS—Vertical Motion SimulatorACFS—Advanced Concepts Flight SimulatorB747—Boeing 747 Simulator

CVSRF Flight Simulation Projects1. CTAS/FMS Data LinkSept 29–Nov 27 (ACFS)Purpose: To evaluate a concept for integrating CTASwith the Flight Management System for operations interminal airspace.

2. Propulsion Controlled Aircraft (PCA) UltraliteNov 23–27 (B747)Purpose: To evaluate a low-cost, fly-by-throttlecontrol system as a backup to an airplane’s primaryflight control system.

3. Balked LandingsMar 1–5 (B747)Purpose: To examine large air-carrier flight tracksand height-loss arrest points during crew-inducedaborted or balked landings.

4. Cockpit Display of Traffic Information (CDTI)Apr 5–May 7 (B747)Purpose: To evaluate the interaction of flight crewsand Air Traffic Control in the presence of a CDTI.

5. Fatigue FeedbackJune 28–Aug 20 (B747)Purpose: To evaluate the effectiveness of fatigue-related feedback on flight-crew performance and toassess a system for the detection of drowsiness.

6. Taxiway Navigation and Situation Awareness(T-NASA) 2July 6–Sept 22 (ACFS)Purpose: To evaluate the use of a head-up displayand an electronic moving map to improve airportsurface operations.

7. FMS Departure ProceduresSept 6–17 (B747)Purpose: To evaluate FMS departure routings inexecuting departure legs coded in conformance withARINC 424 standards.

8. Integrated Tools/Air-Ground Integration (AGIE)Sept 20–Jan 27, 2000 (B747)Purpose: To evaluate air-ground integration proce-dures and to collect data pertaining to users of theground system and on the flight deck.

CVSRF Technology Upgrades1. Navigational Database UpgradePurpose: To create an automated process for compil-ing updated navigational databases for the ACFS.

2. CVSRF Year 2000 (Y2K) Compliance UpgradesPurpose: To upgrade networking equipment, comput-ers, and operating systems for Y2K compliance.

3. Air Traffic Control (ATC) UpgradePurpose: To evaluate the Pseudo Aircraft System andRoute Traffic Manager as possible upgrades to theATC Laboratory.

4. Martian Airplane VisualizationPurpose: To create a virtual-reality visualization of aprobe’s flight through the Martian atmosphere.

5. Flight Management System UpgradePurpose: To provide the capability to support ad-vanced terminal approach procedures using curvedsegments and a variable final approach lengthfunction.


stc

ejor

Pn

oital

umi

SS

MV

00

YF

TC

EJ

OR

PM

AR

GO

RP

DE

TR

OP

PU

SD

ET

RO

PP

US

DE

TR

OP

PU

SD

ET

RO

PP

US

DE

TR

OP

PU

SS

RE

MO

TS

UC

SE

VIT

CE

JB

OT

SE

T

2&

1elci

he

Veltt

uh

Sec

ap

S)

2V

SS

&1

VS

S(t

hgil

Fec

ap

Sn

am

uH

eca

pS

nos

nh

oJA

SA

Nec

ap

Sd

etin

U,r

etn

eC

lle

wkco

R,

gni

eo

B,

ecn

aillA

sm

etsysg

nid

nal

s'reti

bro

elttu

hS

eca

pS

eht

eta

gitsev

nIe

divor

pd

na

seitil

au

qg

nild

na

hl

ortn

ocl

an

oitceri

dd

na

era

noit

agits

evni

fo

stn

em

ele

yra

mirP

.g

nini

artt

ua

norts

ae

httr

op

pus

ots

metsys

cilu

ardy

he

htet

agits

evni

otsti

nu

re

wo

pyr

allixu

at

nerr

uce

htf

ot

ne

mec

alp

erl

aitn

eto

pn

oita

giva

nd

na

ecn

adi

ug

re

hto

eta

gitsev

niot

dn

a)s

UP

A(.s

metsys

elcih

eV

epy

T-

LV

OT

SA

dn

aff

oek

aT

tro

hS

dec

nav

dA(

)g

nid

na

Ll

acitre

V

fo

tn

emtr

ap

eD

esn

efe

Df

ot

ne

mtra

pe

D,

AS

AN

esn

efe

D

sn

oitar

ep

oe

do

my

alpsi

dd

na

lort

noc

dec

nav

da

eta

ulav

Ee

dulc

nilli

ws

noit

are

pO

.tfarcri

at

nair

avL

VO

TS

rof

des

ab-

ero

hst

ag

nid

nal

dn

a,r

evo

h,

noitis

nart

,ffo

ekat

.spi

hsss

alc-D

HL

dn

as

etis

ret

pocil

eH

dra

ob

pih

St

nioJ

ssec

orP

noit

arg

etnI

fo

tn

emtr

ap

eD

esn

efe

Dyv

aN

tni

oJe

htf

on

oita

dilav

dn

an

oitacifir

eve

httr

op

pu

Se

htr

of)

PIH

SJ(ss

ecor

Pn

oitar

get

nIr

etp

ocile

Hdr

ao

bpi

hS

sm

etsyS

not

alu

miS

dn

ag

nile

do

Mec

afret

nIci

ma

nyD

.m

arg

orP

)S

SMI

D(

sm

etsyS

wercri

Atf

arcrot

oR

yrot

aro

ba

Le

nro

briA

stp

ecn

oC

re

hta

ew-ll

Aef

aS

rof

sn

oitar

ep

Otf

arcrot

oR

ymr

Ast

pec

no

Cs

metsy

Sw

ercriA

tfarcr

oto

Re

httr

op

pu

S.)

LA

CS

AR(

yrot

aro

ba

Le

nro

briA

noit

ato

R-ot

uA

ymr

AA

SA

N,y

mrA

rof

stn

em

eriu

qer

gni

euc

noit

om

dn

am

etsysl

ausiv

etal

osIr

etp

ocile

hr

ofsr

eve

un

am

noit

ator-

otu

ag

nimr

ofre

p.s

noit

are

po

tfarcr

oto

Ry

mrA

ymr

AA

SA

N,y

mrA

nihcr

aes

erelci

hev

tfarcr

otor

dn

ay

mrA

eht

tro

pp

uS

dec

nav

da

dn

a,

noit

acifice

psn

gise

d,s

eitila

uq

gnil

dn

ah

.stp

ecn

oc

lav

E8

rot

ortliT

liviC

)lav

EB

8R

TC(

sm

etsyS

noit

aivA

lu

aHtr

oh

S/ytica

pa

Cr

otortli

Tlivi

CA

SA

N,

AA

Fl

ortn

oct

en-l

aru

en

,kcits-e

disr

otortli

T5

1-V

Xet

aul

avE

.ser

ud

ecor

phc

aor

pp

aesi

on-

wol

eta

did

nac

dn

a,s

wal

1S

MF

9r

otortli

Tlivi

C)

1S

MF

9R

TC(

sm

etsyS

noit

aivA

lu

aHtr

oh

S/ytica

pa

Cr

otortli

Tlivi

CA

SA

N,

AA

F

noissi

m-lluf

gnis

us

eussi

not

arg

etni

eca

psria

eta

gitsev

nIg

nitar

ep

ostr

ops

nart

rot

ortlitlivic

rof

noit

alu

misg

nid

nal-

dn

a-ffo

ekat-l

an

oitn

evn

ocf

oylt

ne

dn

ep

ed

ni.sy

aw

nur


stc

ejor

Pn

oital

umi

SF

RS

VC

00

YF

TC

EJ

OR

PM

AR

GO

RP

DE

TR

OP

PU

SD

ET

RO

PP

US

DE

TR

OP

PU

SD

ET

RO

PP

US

DE

TR

OP

PU

SS

RE

MO

TS

UC

SE

VIT

CE

JB

OT

SE

T

fle

Sni

se

ussIn

oitait

og

eN

toli

P)

00

4-7

47(

noit

ara

pe

S

riA

dec

nav

dA

noit

atro

pn

arT

sei

gol

on

hce

T

dn

ahcr

aes

eR

srotc

aF

na

mu

Hn

oisiviD

yg

olo

nhc

eT

fles

gnitc

ud

noc

nis

eussi

noit

aito

ge

nt

olip

eta

ulav

E.t

ne

mn

orivn

et

hgilf-

eerf

citsirut

ufa

nin

oitar

ap

es

lell

ara

Pd

eca

pS

yles

olC

)0

04-

74

7(s

ehc

aor

pp

Aa

erA

la

nimr

eT

ytivitcu

dor

Pd

na

hcra

ese

Rsr

otca

Fn

am

uH

noisivi

Dy

gol

on

hce

T

na

fo

esu

eht

nis

eussi

srotc

afn

am

uh

eta

ulav

Em

etsysec

na

diov

a/ec

na

diu

gn

oita

giva

nd

ecn

avd

al

ellar

ap

dec

aps

yles

olctc

ud

noc

otytili

ba

eht

gni

woll

a.s

ehc

aor

pp

a

kni

Lat

aD

toli

P-rell

otn

oC

ecafr

etnI

sn

oitaci

nu

mm

oC

)0

04-

74

7(k

niL

ata

DA

AF

dn

ahcr

aes

eR

srotc

aF

na

mu

Hn

oisiviD

yg

olo

nhc

eT

fo

esu

eht

otg

nini

atre

ps

eussi

srotc

afn

am

uh

eta

ulav

E.s

noit

acin

um

moc

knil-

ata

dr

ellort

noc-t

olip

se

hca

orp

pA

lell

ara

Pel

pitlu

M)

00

4-7

47(

ret

ne

Cl

acin

hce

TA

AF

AA

Fg

nica

psd

na

seitili

ba

pac

gnil

dn

ah

ciffart

eta

ulav

Eni

se

hca

orp

pa

lell

ara

pel

pitlu

mg

nin

nur

rof

stn

em

eriu

qer

.sn

oitid

noc

laci

gol

oro

ete

mt

ne

murts

ni

Is

dra

dn

atS

ser

ud

ecor

Pt

hgil

F)

00

4-7

47(

ytiC

am

oh

alkO

AA

FA

AF

gniv

orp

mihti

wd

etaic

ossa

se

ussil

an

oitar

ep

oe

nim

axE

ro

gni

niat

nia

meli

hw

ycn

eiciffe

dn

aytic

ap

acl

ani

mret

.ytef

asl

an

oitar

ep

og

nivor

pmi

IIs

dra

dn

atS

ser

ud

ecor

Pt

hgil

F)

00

4-7

47(

ytiC

am

oh

alkO

AA

FA

AF

gniv

orp

mihti

wd

etaic

ossa

se

ussil

an

oitar

ep

oe

nim

axE

ro

gni

niat

nia

meli

hw

ycn

eiciffe

dn

aytic

ap

acl

ani

mret

.ytef

asl

an

oitar

ep

og

nivor

pmi

tn

em

eg

an

aM

th

gilF

SA

TC

)G

AD(

noit

arg

etnI

metsy

S)

SF

CA(

aer

Al

ani

mre

Td

ecn

avd

A/ytivitcu

dor

Pn

oitatr

op

nar

Tri

As

eig

olo

nhc

eT

dn

ahcr

aes

eR

srotc

aF

na

mu

HA

AF

,n

oisiviD

yg

olo

nhc

eT

lort

noc

ciffart

ria

dec

nav

da

fo

noit

arg

etni

eht

eta

ulav

Eev

orp

miot

sm

etsyst

hgilf

otu

adr

ao

b-n

ohti

wsl

oot

.ytica

pac

aer

al

ani

mret

noisl

up

orP

dn

at

hgil

Ft

ne

gillet

nI)

SC

PFI(

metsy

Sl

ortn

oC

)S

FC

A(

dell

ortn

oC

noisl

up

orP

tfarcri

As

ecn

eicS

la

noit

atu

pm

oC

noisivi

D

eht

rof

sei

gol

on

hcet

lort

noc

th

gilfevit

anr

etla

eta

ulav

Esti

otn

oitcn

ufla

ma

sec

neir

epx

etf

arcria

na

ta

htt

nev

e.

metsys

lort

noc

th

gilfyr

amir

p

om

eD

en

alPsr

aM

dec

na

hn

E)

SF

CA(

T&

Res

aB

etar

otceri

Dscit

ua

nor

eA

naitr

aM

fo

syal

psid

laci

hp

arg

dec

na

hn

eet

agits

evnI

naitr

aM

dn

a,l

ed

om

cim

any

dor

ea

en

alPsr

aM

eht

,ni

arret

.scitsiretc

ara

hcer

eh

pso

mta


Vertical Motion SimulatorResearch Facility

The Vertical Motion Simulator(VMS) Complex is a world-classresearch and development facility thatoffers unparalleled capabilities forconducting some of the most excitingand challenging aeronautics andaerospace studies and experiments.The six-degree-of-freedom VMS, withits 60-foot vertical and 40-foot lateralmotion capability, is the world's largestmotion-base simulator. The largeamplitude motion system of the VMSwas designed to aid in research issuesrelating to controls, guidance, displays,automation, and handling qualities ofexisting or proposed aircraft. It is anexcellent tool for investigating issuesrelevant to nap-of-the-earth flight andto landing and rollout studies.

VMS PROJECT

SUMMARIES


Limited-Authority Stability and Control Augmentation SystemDavid Key, U.S. Army AFDD; Robert Heffley, R. Heffley Engineering; Roger Hoh, Hoh Aeronautics;

Steve Belsley, Luong Nguyen, Logicon/LISS

SummaryThis simulation investigated a flight control system

that would enable conventional helicopters to operatewith increased safety and effectiveness in degradedvisual environments. This methodology, using newflight control software and requiring virtually nohardware changes, will be considered for incorpora-tion into upgrades of the Army’s UH-60 Black Hawkhelicopter.Introduction

Limited-Authority Stability and Control Augmenta-tion System (LASCAS) examined a methodology forimproving helicopter operations in a degraded visualenvironment (DVE). In a DVE, such as while usingnight-vision goggles on a moonless night, pilots havedifficulty perceiving fine-grained texture. This is an

essential cue forthe precisecontrol ofattitude andposition duringlow-speed andhover opera-tions. Withoutthis cue, precisecontrol requiresintensiveworkload,leaving littlecapacity formaintainingsituation aware-ness or foraccomplishingtasks.

A stability andcontrol augmen-tation system

(SCAS) increases a helicopter’s stability and en-hances the capabilities of its flight controls. A helicop-ter with a SCAS that achieves attitude command/attitude hold (ACAH) can automatically maintain itsattitude. This significantly reduces the pilot’s need toperceive fine-grained texture, which in turn increasessafety and frees the pilot to perform other tasks.

For safety, a conventional helicopter SCAS islimited to +/-10% authority, in which the SCASactuators can move the control surfaces only +/-10%as much as the pilot. This enables the pilot to com-pensate for system failures. A limited-authority SCAS,

however, has not been used to achieve ACAHbecause the actuators saturate during aggressivemaneuvers.Simulation

LASCAS investigated a methodology for accom-modating this actuator saturation. One key is to use alimited-authority SCAS to provide ACAH for modestmaneuvers but to remove it for aggressive maneu-vers. A scheme was developed to provide a gradualtransition between the augmented and unaugmentedstates. Another key to the LASCAS methodology is tosupplement the limited-authority actuators with thetrim servo actuator. This introduces additionalmovement of the stick that the pilot must learn toaccept.

VMS simulation engineers replaced the SCAS ofthe complex Black Hawk simulation model. Nightconditions were simulated, and tasks were flownusing U.S. Army PNVS-6 night-vision goggles. Sixconfigurations of SCAS were evaluated during fourdifferent flight tasks.

The cab, which recreates the cockpit, was usuallyoriented to provide 40 feet of lateral travel and 8 feetof longitudinal travel. However, for stronger longitudi-nal cues during one of the tasks, it was rotated 90° toprovide 40 feet of travel in the longitudinal direction.Results

The VMS proved critical in providing accurate cuesfor the simulation of the flight tasks that are mostdifficult in a DVE. In particular, the large motion baseproduced high-fidelity motion cues for low-speed andhover operations. Six pilots flew 1632 data runs forevaluation and 222 check runs for documenting thecharacteristics of the different SCAS configurations.

Pilot ratings indicated that handling qualitiesimproved significantly using the LASCAS methodol-ogy. A preliminary assessment suggests that alimited-authority SCAS can improve handling quali-ties sufficiently to make the operation of conventionalhelicopters in DVEs safer and more efficient.

Investigative TeamU.S. Army AFDDNASA Ames Research CenterR. Heffley EngineeringHoh AeronauticsU.S. Navy NTPSU.S. Army ATTCSikorsky Aircraft

A simulated flight control systemdemonstrated improved helicopterhandling qualities in degradedvisual environments.


Boeing B2, A3

SummaryIn the Fiscal Year 1999, two separate simulations

were conducted to support the design and develop-ment of the Boeing X-32 Joint Strike Fighter. Theexperiments addressed conventional, carrier, andshort-takeoff/vertical-landing (STOVL) operations.They also advanced NASA-sponsored research inguidance systems, display technology, and flightcontrols for STOVL aircraft.Introduction

NASA Ames Research Center plays a key role insupport of the U.S. Government’s Joint Strike Fighter(JSF) Program. This program is developing a familyof advanced supersonic strike fighters that willfeature different configurations for multiple branchesof the military and for certain allies. The aircraft willfeature highly common, modular construction tosignificantly reduce the cost of development, produc-tion, and maintenance.

Requirements for the JSF are as follows:• U.S. Air Force—a multi-role aircraft for conventional

takeoff and landing• U.S. Marine Corps—a STOVL aircraft with good

controllability at zero airspeed and during transitionbetween hover and wing-borne flight

• U.S. Navy—a strike fighter with outstanding han-dling at low speeds and adaptations for catapultlaunches and arrested landings

• U.K. Royal Navy—a STOVL aircraft similar to theU.S. Marine Corps versionThe Boeing Company is one of two manufacturers

selected to build and fly a pair of JSF conceptdemonstrator aircraft. Real-time, piloted flight simula-tion is an important step in Boeing’s approach to JSFdesign and development. The VMS, with its largemotion travel, complemented Boeing’s in-house,ground-based simulation prior to in-flight simulationand flight testing. The two simulations investigatedcontrol laws, flying qualities, and advanced controland display design.Simulations

Participating test pilots came from Boeing; theU.S. Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps; and the U.K.Royal Navy and Royal Air Force. Simulations wereconducted for a total of six weeks on the motionbase. In preparation for the motion-base experi-ments, two weeks of fixed-base simulations wereconducted to validate the simulation system re-sponse and to finalize flight tasks and scenarios.Validation of the response was critical because

Larry Moody, Paul McDowell, The Boeing Company; James Franklin, NASA ARC; Leslie Ringo,Estela Hernandez, Emily Lewis, Chuck Perry, Ron Gerdes, Girish Chachad, Logicon/LISS

Boeing’s updated aircraft simulation software wasdirectly integrated into the VMS.

VMS personnel developed head-up displaygraphics and guidance logic for the simulations andincorporated specialized hardware. VMS personnelalso adapted the visual system, providing twodifferent views from the carrier deck for landings atsea.Results

The primary objectives of the simulations weremet, and the customer obtained considerable infor-mation for design analysis and evaluation. Test pilotswere favorably impressed with the important role thatlarge motion cueing played in evaluating the JSF’sflying qualities and mission capabilities. The competi-tion sensitive nature of this project precludes theinclusion of detailed results in this report.

With these simulations, SimLab continued tointegrate the aircraft model software provided by thecustomer into the VMS simulation system. Thisreduced both simulation development time and coststo the customer.

For more information, refer to the web pages forBoeing (http://www.boeing.com) and the JSF Pro-gram (http://www.jast.mil).

Investigative TeamThe Boeing CompanyNASA Ames Research CenterU.S. Air ForceU.S. Marine CorpsU.S. NavyU.K. Royal NavyU.K. Royal Air Force

The Joint Strike Fighter will be an advanced supersonicfighter with four versions featuring modular constructionfor affordability.


Simulation Fidelity Requirements 7

SummaryThis experiment confirmed the fidelity criteria for

roll-lateral coordinated translation motion involving atracking task and generated the subjective andobjective data needed to investigate the fidelityrequirements for pitch-longitudinal motion.Introduction

Simulation Fidelity Requirements 7 (SimFR 7) wasthe latest in an ongoing series of simulations that isinvestigating motion cueing fidelity at the VMS. Theresults contribute to establishing motion fidelityrequirements, quantifying the benefits of motion inflight simulation, and improving the accuracy ofmotion cues at the VMS.

The approach of the fidelity research is to focus onthe roll and lateral degrees of freedom (DOF) using aside-step task and on the pitch and longitudinal DOFusing a dash-and-quick-stop task. Once the motioneffects and criteria are identified and developed, the

William Chung, Logicon/LISS; Duc Tran, Julie Mikula, NASA ARCLeslie Ringo, Logicon/LISS

results can then be applied to more complicatedtasks and maneuvers.Simulation

For comparison, flight tasks were flown with threelevels of motion fidelity developed as a function ofmotion travel. The experiment used a one-to-onemotion cueing configuration for reference.

The two tasks for the roll-lateral DOF included aside-step task to investigate fidelity requirements forhelicopters and a lateral formation flying translationaltask to examine fidelity requirements for fixed-wingaircraft. The third task, limited to the pitch-longitudinalDOF, featured a helicopter in a dash-and-quick-stoptask.Results

The simulation was successful in confirming thefidelity criteria for roll-lateral motion. It was conductedin three parts, with a total of 4 weeks of simulationand 1700 data runs. Subjective data was collectedfrom the pilots using a motion fidelity scale andhandling qualities ratings. Objective data was docu-mented including time performance, position errorperformance, specific force, and control input activi-ties. In addition, the subjective and objective dataneeded to investigate the fidelity requirements forpitch-longitudinal motion were generated.

Investigative TeamNASA Ames Research CenterLogicon Information Systems and Services

This motion fidelity experiment simulated three tasks: a helicopter side-step (top left) and fixed-wing formation flying(bottom left) for the roll-lateral degrees of freedom and a helicopter dash-and-quick-stop (right) for the pitch-longitudinal degrees of freedom.


SummaryThree simulations of Lockheed Martin’s X-35 Joint

Strike Fighter were conducted to support the designand development of the X-35. The experimentsaddressed conventional, carrier, and short-takeoff/vertical-landing (STOVL) operations. They alsoadvanced NASA-sponsored research in guidancesystems, display technology, and flight controls forSTOVL aircraft.Introduction

NASA Ames Research Center plays a key role insupport of the U.S. Government’s Joint Strike Fighter(JSF) Program. This program is developing a familyof advanced supersonic strike fighters that willfeature different configurations for multiple branchesof the military and for certain allies. The aircraft willfeature highly common, modular construction tosignificantly reduce the cost of development, produc-tion, and maintenance.

Requirements for the JSF are as follows:• U.S. Air Force—a multi-role aircraft for conventional

takeoff and landing• U.S. Marine Corps—a STOVL aircraft with good

controllability at zero airspeed and during transitionbetween hover and wing-borne flight

• U.S. Navy—a strike fighter with outstanding han-dling at low speeds and adaptations for catapultlaunches and arrested landings

• U.K. Royal Navy—a STOVL aircraft similar to the

Lockheed Martin CDA, 2,PWSC, 3Mark Tibbs, Lockheed Martin; James Franklin, NASA ARC; Robert Morrison, Leslie Ringo,

Chuck Perry, Norm Bengford, Luong Nguyen, Joe Ogwell, Philip Tung, Ernie Inn, Logicon/LISS

U.S. Marine Corps versionThe Department of Defense awarded the

Lockheed Martin Corporation one of two JSF con-tracts, each calling for two concept demonstratoraircraft. These simulations, using the large motionbase at the VMS, were conducted to complementLockheed Martin’s in-house simulations as part of thedesign and development process. The experimentsaddressed the X-35’s flying qualities, control laws,and advanced controls and displays.Simulations

The three simulations of the X-35 included threeweeks of fixed-base simulations in preparation for atotal of seven weeks of motion-base operations. Thefixed-base sessions validated the simulation systemresponse. This was a critical step because theupdated computer code for the aircraft model wasgenerated by Lockheed Martin and directly integratedinto SimLab’s simulation environment. Specializedhardware was also incorporated for Lockheed Martin.Pilots from Lockheed Martin; the U.S. Air Force,Marine Corps, and Navy; U.K. Royal Air Force andRoyal Navy; and British Aerospace participated in theevaluations.Results

The primary objectives of the simulations weremet, and significant amounts of evaluation data werecollected. The large motion cueing of the VMSsystem played a critical role in evaluating the flyingqualities and mission capabilities of the X-35. Due tothe competition sensitive nature of the project,detailed results cannot be included in this report.

For SimLab, these simulations marked continuedsuccess in integrating the aircraft model and cockpitdisplay software provided by a customer directly intoSimLab’s real-time system. This mode of operationallowed Lockheed Martin to test several last-minutedesign changes, which were expeditiously integratedby SimLab engineers.

For more information, refer to the web pages forLockheed Martin (http://www.lmco.com) and the JSFProgram (http://www.jast.mil).

Investigative TeamLockheed MartinNASA Ames Research CenterU.S. Air ForceU.S. Marine CorpsU.S. NavyU.K. Royal NavyU.K. Royal Air ForceBritish Aerospace

The Joint Strike Fighter will feature versions for the U.S.Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps and the British RoyalNavy.


Space Shuttle Vehicle 1

SummarySimulations of the Space Shuttle orbiter are

performed at the VMS to fine-tune the Shuttleorbiter’s landing systems and to provide landing androllout training for the astronaut corps. The engineer-ing goals of this simulation were to investigatecontrol-surface rate limits for landing with reducedhydraulic flow and to research the appropriate speedfor enabling redundancy for the trim switch.Introduction

The Space Shuttle orbiter is simulated at the VMStwice each year. Researchers have examinedmodifications to the flight-control system, guidanceand navigation systems, head-up displays, flightrules, and the basic simulation model. The simula-tions also provide astronaut training with realisticlanding and rollout scenarios.

SimulationOne objective of Space Shuttle Vehicle 1 (SSV 1)

was to investigate control-surface rate limits forlanding with reduced hydraulic flow. Normally, threeauxiliary power units (APUs) power the controlsurfaces. In the event of a single or double failure,priority rate-limiting software prevents over-demandby limiting the rate at which the various controlsurfaces move. This study examined two newconfigurations of software to reduce over-demandand maintain handling qualities during single-APUlandings. (Such a landing has never been necessaryin the real orbiter.) Maintaining handling qualities isespecially critical in the moments after touchdown ofthe main landing gear when the control surfaces areused extensively and hydraulic demand is high.

A second objective was to examine the appropri-

Howard Law, Charles Hobaugh, NASA JSC; Kyle Cason, Boeing North American;Estela Hernandez, Christopher Sweeney, Logicon/LISS

ate speed for enabling redundancy for the trimswitch. This switch initiates derotation, the loweringof the nose gear to the ground after the main landinggear has touched down. Current software logic in thepitch control system makes the switch inoperative ifeither of two electrical contacts fails; the pilot mustthen achieve derotation manually. New logic wasadded to allow the switch to operate with a singlecontact below an airspeed to be determined in thisstudy.

The third objective of SSV 1 was to train upcomingmission crews and astronaut candidates through aseries of flights. Various runways, visibility conditions,and wind conditions were simulated, and systemfailures were periodically introduced.

Two new out-the-window databases representinglanding sites were introduced in this simulation:Cherry Point in North Carolina and Oceana inMaryland.Results

A total of 961 runs was completed with 38 pilotsduring four weeks of simulation. The crew familiariza-tion session reinforced the importance of the VMS inpreparing upcoming crews for the landing and rolloutphase of the mission and for possible failures duringthat phase.

Preliminary results show that reductions in theelevator and aileron rate limits after main-geartouchdown eliminate almost all of the over-demand inthe hydraulic system during single-APU landings.This rate-limit reduction in less critical controlsallowed pilots to move more critical surfaces asquickly as desired.

Initial testing indicates that the optimum speed forenabling redundancy for the trim switch is 185 knots,the speed pilots currently use as a cue to initiatederotation. Further testing will be conducted to verifythis setting.

Investigative TeamNASA Johnson Space CenterBoeing North AmericanLockheed Engineering and Services Corp.United Space Alliance

Twice yearly, the Space Shuttle orbiter is simulated forengineering studies and astronaut training.


Civil Tiltrotor 8 SCAS

This time-lapse illustration depicts the XV-15 convertingfrom helicopter mode to airplane mode.

SummaryCivil Tiltrotor 8 SCAS simulated the XV-15 tiltrotor

aircraft to aid the development of two stability andcontrol augmentation systems. In addition, thissimulation evaluated flight profiles designed for noiseabatement in the terminal area.Introduction

Civil Tiltrotor 8 SCAS (CTR 8 SCAS) was thelatest in a series of simulations investigating issuesthat include CTR certification, vertiport design, andterminal area operations including noise abatementprocedures.

This simulation implemented two new stability andcontrol augmentation systems (SCASs). An aircraft’sSCAS is the hardware and software that augmentsan aircraft’s stability and control characteristics inresponse to pilot inputs and gusts. The SCASs weresimulated to aid in their development prior to formalevaluation in CTR 8 EVAL.

CTR 8 SCAS also evaluated the handling qualitiesof approach profiles designed to reduce noise nearairports and that are under consideration for aSeptember 1999 flight test. While airplanes normallyapproach airports on a 3° glide slope, tiltrotor aircraftcan approach at steeper angles to avoid obstaclesand airspace reserved for other aircraft. Steepapproaches might require complex noise abatementprocedures that increase a pilot’s workload. Theprofiles were therefore evaluated for feasibility andfor possible improvements.Simulation

The first XV-15 SCAS implemented during CTR 8SCAS was the current Bell Helicopter rate-commanddigital SCAS. Augmenting the SCAS was an optionallimited-authority, rate-command/attitude-hold func-tion, which reduces workload and enhances precisioncontrol. This function will be flight tested later in theyear.

The second SCAS implemented was a neural-network dynamic inverse SCAS developed at theGeorgia Institute of Technology. A neural-net SCAScontinuously adapts flight control characteristics tochanging conditions during flight. This capability willbe especially helpful in providing the pilot with thedesired control properties during conversion betweenhelicopter and airplane modes, when a tiltrotoraircraft’s stability and control characteristics changeradically.

Four noise abatement profiles were simulated forevaluation and possible inclusion in the Septemberflight test. The profiles included a 3° approach, two 9°

William Decker, James Franklin, Laura Iseler, Dan Dugan, NASA ARC;Ron Gerdes, Logicon/LISS; Carl Griffith, Roy Hopkins, Bell Helicopter Textron;

Rolf Rysdyk, Georgia Tech; Steve Belsley, Emily Lewis, Philip Tung, Logicon/LISS

approaches, and a segmented approach that beganwith 3° and ended with 9°.Results

The two SCASs were successfully implemented,and the VMS provided an excellent platform for theinvestigation of pilot interaction with the controlsystems. Early results led to changes being incorpo-rated and evaluated during the simulation. The BellHelicopter SCAS was improved, and areas wereidentified for fine tuning; this process required afraction of the time it would take in flight testing. The

neural-net SCAS was also improved but requiresfurther development.

NASA and Bell Helicopter pilots evaluated thehandling qualities of the four approach profiles. Thisportion of the simulation yielded important feedbackto acoustics and handling-qualities engineers. One ofthe 9° approaches had severe handling-qualitiesdeficiencies and will not be implemented for flight.Handling qualities evaluations of the other threeapproaches suggested improvements that will beimplemented for the flight test.

Investigative TeamNASA Ames Research CenterLogicon Information Systems and ServicesBell Helicopter TextronGeorgia Institute of Technology


Matt Whalley, Army/NASA Rotorcraft Division;Chuck Perry, Norm Bengford, Logicon/LISS

Helicopter Maneuver Envelope Enhancement 6

SummaryThis simulation experiment investigated the

prediction of helicopter flight envelope limits and thecommunication of those limits to the pilot using activeside-stick controllers.Introduction

The objective of the Helicopter Maneuver Enve-lope Enhancement (HelMEE) series of experimentsis to develop improved methods for alerting pilots tooperational limits during helicopter flight in order toenhance safety and reduce pilot workload.

Conventional helicopter controls are mechanicallyconnected to control surfaces, enabling the pilot tofeel forces that reflect the state of the aircraft. Incontrast, side sticks are connected to control sur-faces electronically (fly-by-wire), and thereforecontrol forces do not vary with the aircraft’s state. Theuse of active side sticks would enable the program-ming of force characteristics to reproduce the feel ofmechanical systems and to communicate additionalinformation about flight envelope limits to the pilot.Simulation

The objectives of HelMEE 6 were to:• Integrate active side sticks into the UH-60 Black

Hawk simulation in place of the conventional cyclic(center stick) and collective.

• Evaluate the side sticks with the cueing of flightenvelope limits developed in previous HelMEEresearch.

• Introduce a new limit cue for mast bending momentduring ground handling, such as taxiing and slopelandings.Simulation development focused on integrating a

new digital, two-axis side sticks developed by StirlingDynamics. The side sticks combine a computercontroller and electric motors in a self-contained unit.Force characteristics are continuously updated via ahigh-speed Ethernet connection with the host com-puter. A new interface program was implemented thatbypassed the normal digital-to-analog interface.

Pilots flew four test configurations: no cues, tactilecues only, head-up display (HUD) cues only, andboth tactile and HUD cues. Tactile cues included stickshaking for all three limits tested. Three tasks wereflown: bobup/bobdown, acceleration/deceleration,and a maximum performance turn. A new slopelanding task was implemented, but no data wastaken for this task.

ResultsOver 300 data runs indicated that the active stick

cueing significantly improved pilot performance andratings. Transmission torque exceedances werereduced 90% for two of the tasks and eliminatedcompletely for the third task. Blade stall exceedanceswere reduced 75% in the task that induced this limitmost. Improved airspeed control was exhibited in themaximum performance turn. Mast bending momentwas not significant in the tasks flown. Overall, pilotcomments were quite favorable in regard to theeffectiveness, smoothness, and responsiveness ofthe side sticks.

Investigative TeamArmy/NASA Rotorcraft DivisionNASA Ames Research CenterBell Helicopter TextronBoeing HelicoptersLogicon Information Systems and ServicesSikorsky AircraftU.S. Army

timiL lortnoC euC

euqrotnoissimsnarT evitcelloC potstfoS

llatsedalB cilcyC potstfoscilcyctfA

tnemomgnidnebtsaM cilcyC )thgilfni(gnipmaD)dnuorgno(potstfoS

In simulation of theBlack Hawkhelicopter, newelectronic side stickswere programmed tofeel like conventionalflight controls and tocommunicateadditional tactile cues.


High-Speed Civil Transport Ames 8

The High-Speed Civil Transport would significantlyreduce flight times for transoceanic travel.

SummaryThis simulation measured the handling qualities

and general performance of the current design of asupersonic passenger airplane. In addition, it final-ized flight-control standards for this class of aircraft.Introduction

NASA’s High-Speed Research (HSR) Programwas initiated in 1990 to develop essential technolo-gies for a High-Speed Civil Transport (HSCT) incooperation with the U.S. aeronautics industry. Theaircraft would carry 300 passengers at Mach 2.4.NASA is now ready to pass the program results on toindustry.

HSCT Ames 8 (HSCT A8) was the last of morethan a dozen simulations that researched flightcontrol, navigation, and guidance systems. Tocomplete the simulation series, HSCT A8 focused onmeasuring the current design’s performance andfinalizing flight control standards.Simulation

Part 1 of HSCT A8 measured the handling quali-ties and performance of the current design againstthe HSR Program’s standards as set forth in the AeroPerformance 8 Metric. Particular attention was paidto takeoff and landing, including crosswind landingsand go-arounds. Methodology for the head-updisplay used in takeoff and landing was also investi-gated. Finally, an autoland system, including guid-ance and control displays, was tested for the firsttime.

Part 1 included the dynamic aeroservoelastic

Gordon Hardy, Logicon/LISS; Todd Williams, James Ray, Ed Coleman, Boeing;Chris Sweeney, Emily Lewis, Philip Tung, Joe Ogwell, Logicon/LISS

(DASE) portion of the simulation model. DASE is theinteraction of aerodynamic, structural (elastic), andinertial forces that can lead to unwanted vibrations inboth subsonic and supersonic flight. Structural modecontrol manipulated the control surfaces to minimizethese vibrations.

Part 2 of HSCT A8 updated the flight controlrequirements for the HSCT class contained in theHSR Program’s Flight Control System RequirementsSpecification. It concentrated on the longitudinal flightcontrol requirements because a unique flight-path-rate command system was used instead of the moreconventional attitude command type of control. Thisis the first time that flight-path-rate command hasbeen seriously considered for a proposed aircraft.Part 2 also continued the development of lateral-directional flying qualities criteria.Results

With its large motion base and realistic cues forpiloted simulation, the VMS proved invaluable inreproducing the handling qualities of the uniquelyconfigured HSCT. A total of 1496 data runs with eightpilots were completed. Even with the adverse effectsof the DASE, Part 1 showed a significant improve-ment in the Aero Performance 8 Metric due toenhancements to the control system and pilotdisplays. Part 2 indicated that even with the uniquelongitudinal control law, current specifications forflight control systems are still generally acceptableand may even be relaxed in some areas.

Investigative TeamNASA Ames Research CenterThe Boeing CompanyNASA Langley Research CenterVeridian Engineering (Calspan)Honeywell

This simulation concluded a series of experiments criticalto the development of technologies for a supersonicpassenger airplane.

Los Angeles

Sydney

Mac

h .8

4 =

14 h

ours

Mach 2.4 = 4.3 hours

Mach .84 = 10.3 hours

Tokyo

Honolulu

Mac

h 2.

4 =

7.3

hour

s

(1 h

our s

top)


Space Shuttle Vehicle 2

SummaryThis one-week simulation of the Space Shuttle

orbiter featured crew familiarization for astronautsand astronaut candidates.Introduction

The very first VMS simulation, conducted in 1981,simulated the Space Shuttle orbiter. Today, the VMScontinues to simulate touchdown and rollout of theorbiter twice each year.

The orbiter presents challenging landing condi-tions. With no engines operating, the orbiter glides totouchdown without power for maneuvering or goingaround. It touches down at approximately 235 milesper hour, more than twice the speed at which mostaircraft land. This makes realistic training for astro-nauts critical. At the VMS, pilots experience variousflight conditions and system failures to prepare themfor this important phase of flight.Simulation

Astronauts experienced a number of variablesduring simulation:• Runway location and type• Vehicle weight• Visibility• Wind direction and speed

The VMS simulates eight landing sites in the U.S.including the dry lake beds at Edwards Air ForceBase and White Sands Missile Range. The VMS alsosimulates the four Transoceanic Abort Landing (TAL)sites. A TAL would occur in the event of a majorsystem failure during launch; if it were too late toreturn for landing at Kennedy Space Center and tooearly to circle the earth for another opportunity to landin the U.S., the orbiter would land on the far side of

Howard Law, Paul Lockhart, NASA JSC; Ed Digon, Boeing; Brian Bahari, Lockheed;Estela Hernandez, Leslie Ringo, Logicon/LISS

Eileen Collins, first woman to pilot the orbiter and tocommand the Shuttle, prepares for crew familiarization.The VMS provides important training for orbiter pilots.

the Atlantic Ocean. There are two TAL sites in Spain,one in Morocco, and one in Gambia.

Astronauts also rehearsed procedures for handlingfailures to the:• Tires• Drag chute• Auxiliary power units• Automatic derotation systemResults

In one week of simulation, 18 pilots few over 300data runs. Simulation provided the real-time deliveryof high-fidelity cues, including realistic out-the-window scenes, instrumentation, and motion. Thissimulation reinforced the importance of the VMS inpreparing upcoming crews for the landing and rolloutphase and for possible failures during that phase.

Investigative TeamNASA Johnson Space CenterThe Boeing CompanyLockheed MartinUnited Space Alliance


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 flight crews, formu-

lates principles and design criteria for future aviation environ-ments, evaluates new and contemporary air traffic control procedures, and develops new training and simula-tion techniques required by the continued technical evolution of flight systems.

Studies have shown that human error plays a part in 60 to 80 percent of all aviation accidents. The Crew-Vehicle Systems Research Facility allows scientists to study how errors are made, as well as the effects ofautomation, advanced instrumentation, and other factors, such as fatigue, on human performance in aircraft.The facility includes two flight simulators—an FAA certified Level D Boeing 747-400 and an Advanced Con-cepts Flight Simulator as well as a simulated Air Traffic Control System. Both flight simulators are capable offull-mission simulation.

CVSRF PROJECT

SUMMARIES


CTAS/FMS Data Link

This Vertical Situation Display is one tool being evaluatedthat is intended to safely maximize airport capacity.

Everett Palmer, Terry Rager, NASA ARC; Barry Crane, Thomas Prevot, SJSU;Don Bryant, Ramesh Panda, Fritz Renema, Rod Ketchum, ManTech

SummaryThis study evaluated a new concept for the

integration of the Center TRACON AutomationSystem with the Flight Management System foroperations in terminal airspace. It was conducted inthe Advanced Concepts Flight Simulator to improveefficiency and maximize airport capacity withoutcompromising safety.Introduction

Arrival and approach traffic flow management toairports is still accomplished via analog communica-tions and tactical vectoring, a method that needs tobe upgraded. The Flight Management System (FMS)installed in most of the current transport aircraft isalready capable of computing and flying optimaltrajectories from the origin airport to the destinationairport. However, the FMS is seldom used in thearrival phase due to route change programmingsteps involved in terminal-area Air Traffic Control(ATC) vectoring.

The Center TRACON Automation System (CTAS)is a set of automation tools developed at Ames to aidthe controller with aircraft sequencing, separation,flow control, and scheduling. Final Approach SpacingTool (FAST) is one of the components of CTAS usedfor managing traffic in the TRACON airspace. Avariant of FAST is currently being field tested in theDallas/Fort Worth Metroplex. FAST can providelanding sequences, runway assignments, and speedand heading advisories to help the aircraft meet

computed trajectories. The present study utilized anadvanced version of FAST with Data Link capabilitiesto uplink a desired route directly to the FMS.Simulation

The main objective of this study was to evaluatethe human-factors benefits in terms of crew perfor-mance, workload, and flight-deck communication; theinterface; and the procedures involved in the CTASand FMS integrated operations.

The experiment configuration consisted of theAdvanced Concepts Flight Simulator (ACFS), CTAS,and Pseudo Aircraft Simulation (PAS) stations, whichsupplied simulated traffic. The ACFS included anFMS enhanced with customized FMS approachprocedures and Data Link for clearance loadingcapabilities. A Data Link display for pilot viewing ofuplinked ATC message text was integrated into theupper Engine Indication and Crew Alert Systemdisplay. Special Data Link buttons were also providedon the glare shield for message response inputs.

A Vertical Situation Display (VSD) integrated intothe Navigation Display helped evaluate a relatedresearch concept. The VSD graphically displayed theplanned vertical profile including various speed andaltitude constraints in the active trajectory. For pilotpreview, a modified clearance could be overlaid in adifferent color highlighting the new profile against theactive profile. The VSD may enhance situationalawareness as many FMS automation related prob-lems are associated with vertical flight-path manage-ment.Results

The full-mission simulation study in the ACFS wasset in the Dallas/Fort Worth terminal airspace. A totalof twelve crews participated from major commercialair carriers with Type ratings on the Boeing 757/767,737-500 and 777. Seven descent scenarios wereflown combining current day, FMS, and CTAS/FMSprocedures. This study validated the viability of FMSand CTAS/FMS descent procedures. A follow-onexperiment is planned to validate use of theseprocedures in higher pilot workload conditions.

Investigative TeamNASA Ames Research CenterSan Jose State University


Propulsion Controlled Aircraft UltraliteJohn Bull, Caelum Research Corp.; Frank W. Burcham, NASA Dryden; Edward Kudzia, Foothill

DeAnza College; John Kaneshige, NASA ARC; Diane Carpenter, Jerry Jones, ManTech

The Propulsion Controlled Aircraft Ultralite concept, diagrammedhere, could lead to a low-cost, emergency backup to an airplane’sprimary flight control system.

SummaryThe B747-400 simulator was used to examine a

low-cost, fly-by-throttle control system as a backupfor use in the event of an emergency or a malfunctionof an airplane’s primary flight control system.Introduction

In the last 25 years, at least 10 aircraft haveexperienced major flight-control system failureswhere the crew had to resort to engine thrust foremergency flight control. In most cases, theseattempts resulted in crashes. In 1989, the NationalTransportation Safety Board recommended “researchand development of backup flight control systems fornewly certified wide-body airplanes that utilize analternate source of motive power separate from thatsource used for the conventional control system.”

The NASA Dryden Flight Research Center hasdeveloped a Propulsion Controlled Aircraft (PCA)system in which computer-controlled engine thrust isused to provide emergency flight-control capability.Aircraft not equipped with full-authority digital enginecontrol require implementations of PCA technologythat can be installed on existing systems. Pilotedtransport aircraft simulation studies atAmes have examined a PCA Ultraliteconcept, in which thrust control isprovided through a combination of theautothrottle system and manual pilotcontrol with the aid of flight directorguidance.Simulation

This study evaluated the PCAUltralite concept, which consists ofautomatic PCA commands for symmet-ric engine thrust to control pitch andmanual pilot commands for asymmetricengine thrust to control roll.

The real-time software modulecreated for previous B747 PCA experi-ments was modified for use with thisstudy. The module consists of a set ofcontrol laws simulating a closed-loopcontrol system designed to maintainadequate controllability and maneuver-ability of the aircraft in flight using onlythrust modulation with the normal flight-control system inoperative.

The software module was modified to add acalculation for flight director commands that drive theflight directors displayed on the Primary Flight

Display whenever the PCA system was engaged.Two different modes of roll flight director operationwere implemented. The first mode was a bank flightdirector that used the PCA bank command to drivethe roll flight director. The second mode was athrottle flight director that used the error between thethrottle servo command and the throttle position todrive the roll flight director. Data was gathered usingthe IBM Data Gathering System.Results

With the addition of PCA Ultralite providing auto-matic pitch control, pilots commented that “singletasking the pilot makes this acceptable (or at leasttolerable)” and that “without pitch being handledautomatically (a misaligned approach) would beunsalvageable.” While the PCA flight director pro-vided quicker feedback, allowing for significantlysmaller throttle corrections, achieving a stabilizedapproach still varied among evaluation pilots.

Investigative TeamCaelum Research CorporationNASA Ames Research CenterNASA Dryden Research Center


Dave Lankford, Shahar Ladecky, FAA, Oklahoma City; Barry Scott, FAA, NASA ARC;Jerry Jones, Rod Ketchum, Diane Carpenter, ManTech

Balked Landings

This study examined Obstacle Free Zone dimensions forbalked landings and traditional missed approach.

SummaryThis test involving the B747-400 simulator is the

latest in a series that examined large air carrieraircraft flight tracks and height-loss arrest pointsduring crew-induced aborted or balked landings.These aborts were initiated upon reaching publisheddecision height/altitude and beyond to a minimum of30 feet above ground level. Category I InstrumentLanding System approaches were conducted usingthe auto-land systems for each of the runs. Theresults are analyzed relative to Obstacle Free Zonespace and dimension requirements.Introduction

The Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA)Advisory Circular 150/5300-13, Airport Design,accounts for many elements including runways,shoulders, blast pads, clearways, runway safetyareas, and adjacent taxiways. This advisory circularmandates Obstacle Free Zone (OFZ) dimensions forairplanes with wingspans up to 262 feet. For largeraircraft, information is needed for calculating the OFZto provide safe conditions below the decision height.

The FAA’s Flight Procedure Standards Branchconducted these simulations to assess various go-around call heights for the development of standardsand operation criteria.

SimulationThis study consisted of a series of approaches to

Denver International Airport with representativeweather conditions. Flight-track and height-loss dataoccurring subsequent to arrival at Category I decisionheights was collected for missed approach andaborted/balked landings. Particular attention waspaid to introducing all possible extreme wind andother conditions allowable for the type approachunder test. This enabled the possible impact on OFZ-required space and crew response/techniques to beevaluated. No variations in aircraft gross weight wereintroduced for these runs. Six days of data runs werecompleted for this study totaling 60 runs, utilizingManTech and NASA flight crews. Data collectionincluded digital readouts of aircraft state and perfor-mance data.Results

Test results will support Monte Carlo simulationstudies using the FAA’s Airspace Simulation andAnalysis for Terminal Procedures (TERPS). Thesesimulations calculate the probabilities of collisionsduring aborted landings of new larger aircraft. Thiswork will in turn assist the New Larger AirplaneWorking group of the International Civil AviationOrganization in developing guidance for the introduc-tion of new, larger airplane operations to existingairports.

Investigative TeamFAA, Oklahoma CityNASA Ames Research Center

Traditional missedapproach

Balked landing/climb outDecision

height


SummaryThe objective of this study on the B747-400

simulator was to evaluate flight crew and Air TrafficControl interaction when an advanced CockpitDisplay of Traffic Information was used by the flightcrew.Introduction

This study was conducted by the Human Informa-tion Processing Research Branch at Ames. It was afollow-on investigation to the Free-Flight Demonstra-tion conducted in the spring of 1997. The CockpitDisplay of Traffic Information (CDTI) system usedGlobal Positioning System (GPS) data link positionreporting with display of all traffic, conflict detection(Kuchar’s logic), conflict resolution tools (RouteAssessment Tool, or RAT), and flight plan informationfor all participating aircraft.

The aircraft navigation display and RAT developedfor this study were directed towards free flight,concentrating on the en-route segment and collisionavoidance. For the concept of free flight to workefficiently, intent information (future position) isrequired. Flight plans provide the required intentinformation; thus, flight plans are tightly coupled withthis work. The CDTI display, the Advanced RouteAssessment and Planning Tool (ARAT) and thePredictor control were designed for this study so thatthe flight crew can visually define an alternate en-route flight plan that is free of the probability ofcollision with other traffic.Simulation

The CVSRF staff created several new softwaremodules and modified many existing modules on theB747 host computer. The research staff provided two

Cockpit Display of Traffic InformationVernol Battiste, Walter Johnson, NASA ARC; Jerry Jones, Rod Ketchum, George Mitchell,

Diane Carpenter, Ghislain Saillant, Ian MacLure, ManTech

computers, configured with the CDTI-display soft-ware, that were used as the primary hub of informa-tion exchange. These computers communicated withthe B747 simulator and the Pseudo Aircraft System(PAS) via TCP/IP. When the MAP navigation displaymode was selected by a pilot in the cockpit, CDTIdisplays switched into view. The ARAT and PredictorControl Panels then interfaced with the CDTI display.PAS generated traffic for each scenario. Softwaremodifications were made on the B747 host computerto accommodate the transfer of information betweenthe CDTI computers and the B747 Flight Manage-ment Computer and CDTI control panels.Results

Thirteen qualified airline crews participated in 91training runs and 104 experiment data runs. Thesimulation allowed line pilots to have input regardingthe technology while the researchers evaluatedusability and pilot interaction. Research findings areforthcoming.

Investigative TeamNASA Ames Research Center

This Navigation Display was designed to help flightcrews visually define safe flight plans in a free-flightenvironment.

Two panels designed for this study were the AdvancedRoute Assessment and Planning Tool Panel (top) and thePredictor Control Panel (bottom).


Dr. David Neri, NASA ARC; Ray Oyung, SJSU; Rod Ketchum, Jerry Jones, George Mitchell, GhislainSaillant, Fritz Renema, Craig Pires, Jason Hill, Eric Gardner, Vic Loesche, Diane Carpenter, ManTech

Fatigue Feedback

Pilots were videotaped and monitored to gauge theiralertness on a long, late-night flight simulation.

SummaryThis ongoing study investigates the effectiveness

of fatigue-related feedback on the alertness,neurobehavioral performance, and behavior of flightcrews and evaluates the feasibility and utility of avideo-based, automated system for detecting drowsi-ness and providing feedback to flight crews.Introduction

Long, uneventful flights in modern, highly auto-mated aircraft are characterized by unique condi-tions; physical inactivity, dim light levels, steadybackground noise; and limited environmental ma-nipulations. In addition, extensive pilot monitoring of

aircraft systems, increased vigilance for low-fre-quency occurrences, and reduced social and cogni-tive interaction are new elements with which flightcrews must deal. Together these factors create acontext in which underlying sleepiness is likely tomanifest itself in the form of reduced alertness,compromised vigilance, and impaired performance. Ifthe flight occurs during hours when the biologicalclock is programming the body for sleep, fatigue andsleepiness levels are further increased and cansignificantly reduce the safety margin.

The Percent Closed (PERCLOS) data system was

a primary element of this experiment. PERCLOS is aself-contained, infrared camera data collection andalerting system tested by the Federal HighwayAdministration in commercial trucking. This technol-ogy is currently being evaluated for use in theaviation environment.

Pilots were videotaped and monitored to gaugetheir alertness on a long, late night flight simulation.Simulation

The Systems Safety Research Branch of theHuman Factors Research and Technology Divisionconducted this study, also called the Evaluation of In-Flight Alertness Management Technology. Theexperiment involved a six-hour, night, over-waterflight scenario, looking at the effect of feedback onsubsequent alertness, cognitive performance, andother behaviors. Twelve flight crews from six differentairlines were the subjects of this study. The nature ofthis experiment was such that performing it duringnighttime hours was critical. Due to this requirement,the facility was staffed from 11:00 p.m. through 8:00a.m. with the simulation running from 2:00 a.m.through 8:00 a.m.

PERCLOS devices were mounted on the flightdeck to collect information from each pilot’s face andprovide necessary feedback. VCRs were set up witha quad display and full-screen recording of the pilot’sface. The quad display contained video from over-head flight deck cameras with pan and tilt capabilityas well as views of each of the pilot’s faces.

All physiological, vigilance performance, andsubjective data was collected with portable equip-ment furnished by the Fatigue CountermeasuresProgram.Results

Data is currently being evaluated by the FatigueCountermeasures Program and the findings will bepublished for the aviation community’s use as well asto determine the size and scope of further studies.



SummaryThis follow-up study using the Advanced Concepts

Flight Simulator evaluated the use of a head-updisplay and an electronic moving map to providenavigation and guidance information to aircraft flightcrews. The goal is to improve airport runway turn-offand surface taxi operations in bad weather and atnight to increase airport capacity and improveaviation safety.Introduction

Current airport surface operations are handledwith verbal instructions over the radio with flightcrews using paper maps to navigate around theairport. In bad weather (low visibility) and at night,this can lead to very slow taxi operations and poten-tially dangerous situations. Under these conditions,many major U.S. airports have taxi capacity limita-tions, and several taxi accidents occur each year.Many commercial airliners now have electronic-navigation and head-up displays installed, but theyare not utilized in any significant way for taxi opera-tions. This experiment supported the Low-VisibilityLanding and Surface Operations element of theTerminal Area Productivity Program.Simulation

Taxiway Navigation and Situation Awareness 2(T-NASA 2) continued the concept of electronicallyloading the taxi route into an on-board system anddisplaying the route on both the head-up display

Taxiway Navigation and Situation Awareness 2Dave Foyle, NASA ARC; Becky Hooey, SJSU;

Don Bryant, Anna Dabrowski, Rod Ketchum, Ian MacLure, ManTech

(HUD) and electronic moving map (EMM—see backcover). New technology introduced included roll-outand turn-off (ROTO) HUD guidance and data-linkedcommunications, clearances, and route loading withan active crew interface.

Experiment runs started with crews flying on shortfinal descent to one of several runways at ChicagoO’Hare airport. Following landing, the crews taxied tothe terminal. The runs included base-line cases withvoice communication and paper map only; cases withdata-linked route and communications; and caseswith data-linked route and communications, EMM,and HUD.Results

Twenty-one airline crews performed 294 landingand taxi runs. Digital data of runway rollout and taxiperformance was collected along with video andaudio recordings of the crews’ activities. An extensivedebrief was performed to get crew comments andopinions on the system.

T-NASA 2 has drawn favorable comments frompilots that evaluated the system. The capability offull-mission simulation has allowed researchers towatch the interactivity of crews with new technologyand observe problems not previously identified.


This experiment evaluated the use of a head-up display and an electronic moving map to improve airport surfaceoperations.


SummaryWith the implementation of today’s Flight Manage-

ment Systems (FMS) and the navigation concept ofRequired Navigation Performance (RNP), conven-tional area navigation (RNAV) departure proceduresusing the FMS can now extend the overall navigationservice. The objective of this study using the B747-400 simulator was to evaluate various FMS departureroutings, with operational variance in the use of theFMS, in executing departure legs coded in conform-ance with ARINC 424 standards.Introduction

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Order8260.44 provides criteria for constructing instrumentflight rules (IFR) RNAV departure procedures.Procedures designed using current criteria are foruse by aircraft with only RNAV or Global PositioningSystem (GPS) RNAV capability. The data derivedfrom this examination will assist in the developmentof departure procedure design standards for FMS/RNP/RNAV departures based on operational andsystem requirements.

At certain locations, obstacles or noise-sensitiveareas close to the departure track create a require-ment for highly accurate flight systems and specialoperational procedures to enter and maintain anarrow departure corridor. This project will identifythose operational and system requirements that mustbe considered in the total development of TerminalProcedures RNAV Departure Procedure criteria.Simulation

This study examined departure routings of variousleg types, waypoint types, and leg lengths; observedthe operational performance of those procedures;and collected aircraft flight path data to supportefforts in adding to or revising current RNAV depar-ture standards.

A number of runs of each planned type departurewere conducted while capturing aircraft positionrelative to intended flight track. The various departureroutes were constructed by the FAA Flight Procedure

FMS Departure ProceduresFrank Hasman, David Lankford, FAA, Oklahoma City; Barry Scott, FAA, NASA ARC;

Jerry Jones, Rod Ketchum, George Mitchell, Diane Carpenter, ManTech

Standards Branch in Oklahoma City.Takeoffs were made at either maximum gross

weight or a moderate gross weight from runway 27Lat Chicago O’Hare International Airport. Twenty-knotdirect crosswinds from the left or the right wereexamined for their effect on the aircraft ground trackwith respect to the FMS-computed track. A customFMS navigational database was created byHoneywell for the ten departure routes used in thisstudy.Results

The Level D FAA certification of the B747-400 wasessential for this study. Ten days of data runs withBoeing 747-400 airline flight crews were completedfor a total of 240 runs. Research results are pending.

Investigative TeamFAA, Oklahoma CityNASA Ames Research Center

This map illustrates the aircraft ground track (dotted line)with respect to the FMS-computed track (solid line) duringa departure.


SummaryThis experiment involving the B747-400 simulator

conducted an early evaluation of air-ground integra-tion procedures and concepts. In addition, a jointexperiment by the William J. Hughes FAA TechnicalCenter and NASA Ames collected data pertaining tousers of the ground system and on the flight deck.Introduction

In the free-flight environment, aircraft will be ableto maneuver with more autonomy and flexibility.However, free flight will require the definition of newzones around each aircraft similar to those currentlyprovided by the alert algorithms of the Traffic Alertand Collision Avoidance System (TCAS). Thesezones will be defined as the alert and protectedzones. Roles and responsibilities associated withtransgressions of these zones need to be definedand evaluated. There may be difficulties in coordina-tion between the controller and the flight crew incases where separation authority is provided to theflight crew.

The overall goal was to conduct an early examina-tion of procedures and events in a dynamic environ-ment where the control of aircraft can be centralized(conventional Air Traffic Control procedures) ordistributed (self-separation).Simulation

This study was conducted in conjunction with theHuman-Automation Integration Research Branch atAmes. It involved researchers and laboratories at theFederal Aviation Administration Technical Centers(FAATCs) in Atlantic City and New Jersey and at theCVSRF. Pilots at the CVSRF participated in theB747-400 simulator and at a pseudo pilot stationusing the Pseudo Aircraft System (PAS). Air TrafficControl test subjects participated at the FAATCs. Allair traffic other than the B747-400 and the pseudopilot were generated at the FAATCs and relayed tothe CVSRF.

AATT Integrated Tools Study/Air-Ground Integration ExperimentSandy Lozito, NASA ARC; Patricia Cashion, Victoria Dulchinos,

Melisa Dunbar, Dave Jara, Margaret Mackintosh, Alison McGann, SJSU;Jerry Jones, Rod Ketchum, George Mitchell, Diane Carpenter, Ghislain Saillant,

Ian MacLure, Fritz Renema, Craig Pires, Joe King, Tom Prehm, Gary Uyehara, ManTech

For this experiment, a new, dedicated T-1 line wasinstalled between Ames and the FAATCs. The T-1line sent and received voice communications usingVoice Over IP technology in addition to aircraft data.The software for this study was an upgrade to theprevious Advanced Air Transportation Technologies(AATT) 3 experiment software. The majority of thenew software was developed to support the newinterface to the FAATCs.Results

This experiment was the first time controller andpilot interaction was studied in a real-time, high-fidelity simulation environment.


This diagram depicts the architecture used in a study ofair-ground integration procedures and concepts.


State-of-the-ArtSimulation Facilities

Providing advanced flightsimulation capabilities requirescontinual modernization. To keeppace with evolving customerneeds, SimLab strives to optimizethe simulation systems, fromcockpits to computers to technol-ogy for real-time networking withflight simulators and laboratories inremote locations.

TECHNOLOGY UPGRADE

PROJECTS


Virtual Laboratory

SummaryThe Virtual Laboratory represents an extensible

approach to conducting simulation experiments. Itallows researchers at remote sites to interactivelyparticipate in live simulation experiments conducted inresearch laboratories at Ames.Capabilities

Using the Virtual Laboratory (VLAB), remote re-searchers navigate through a virtual VMS lab environ-ment. With the click of a mouse, users select, view, andposition displays available in the actual lab. Theseinclude the pilot’s front-window scene, head-up andhead-down displays, data displays, and strip charts.Complementing the virtual environment are integratedpost-run data analysis tools, two-way audio communi-cation, video conferencing, and ambient sound capa-bilities.Implementation

The VLAB system consists of four functional compo-nents:• The VLAB client (SGI Octane workstation) presents

the virtual lab and its displays.• A network-based video transmission system provides

the same out-the-window video seen by the pilots atthe VMS.

• A network-based audio transmission system providesambient laboratory sound, pilot communication, andprivate voice channels.

• A video-conferencing and data-analysis workstation(SGI O2) furnishes video conferencing and post-rundata analysis capabilities.

Deployment of a Laptop ClientVLAB’s most exciting deployment to date occurred

in February during simulation of the Space Shuttleorbiter. This marked the first time that a low-costdesktop VLAB client on a personal computerwas deployed for use in conjunction with a livesimulation experiment between JohnsonSpace Center (JSC) and the VMS. For the firsttime, JSC researchers were able to participatein the experiment from their desktops insteadof having to go to a separate lab in their facility.Space Shuttle Development Conference

In July, the first annual Space ShuttleDevelopment Conference was held at Ames toenable government, industry, and academia toaddress upgrades to the Shuttle fleet. VLABwas invited to display both the full client suiteand the laptop client system in conjunction witha live simulation at the VMS. Several attendeesvisited both the Virtual Lab facilities and theactual VMS. Visitors and exhibitors alike were

impressed with the live capability of the VLAB system.Future Plans

Future work will include enhancing the fidelity of theimmersive nature of VLAB, providing additional userinput/output features, increasing VLAB’s applicability toseveral simulation experiments, collaborating withtechnology experts within and outside of Ames, andincreasing its diversity by applying the VLAB technol-ogy in areas beyond flight simulation at the VMS.

Future enhancements to the desktop/laptop clientsystems being considered include: incorporation oftwo-way voice communication within the client environ-ment, support of multiple platforms, incorporation of fullvideo conferencing capabilities within or in parallel withthe VLAB client application, incorporation of post dataanalysis capabilities within the client platform, and astechnologies permit, incorporation of direct out-the-window scene viewing within the VLAB environment.

VLAB embodies Ames Research Center’s missionto lead the world in Information Technology. It allowsgovernment and industry greater access to NASAexpertise in a hands-on fashion. VLAB is an extensionof a national research facility that enables industry toimprove and accelerate its design process, yieldingcutting-edge aeronautical products.

Development TeamRussell Sansom, Chuck Gregory, Rachel Wang-Yeh, T.Martin Pethtel, Tim Trammell, Christopher Sweeney,Thomas Crawford, Paul Chaplin, Daniel Wilkins,Logicon/LISSThomas Alderete, Steven Cowart, Julie Mikula, JohnGriffin, NASA Ames Research Center

For more information, visit VLAB’s web site:http://www.simlabs.arc.nasa.gov/vlab.

Using VLAB, researchers in remote locations monitor and interactwith VMS simulations as they occur.


Remote Development Environment

SummaryThe new Remote Development Environment

enables users to develop VMS-compatible aircraftsimulation models at their own engineering sites.These models can then be imported expediently intothe VMS complex for their experiments.System Capabilities

The Remote Development Environment (RDE)project created a software environment for develop-ing aircraft simulation models and a graphics environ-ment for visualizing model performance. The systemallows a developer to work at a remote site, thenimport a completed model directly into piloted simula-tions at the VMS by virtue of model compatibility withthe VMS software environment. The RDE wasdeveloped by VMS personnel and completed inFebruary 1999.

The system consists of three major parts: thepilot’s control console, the Virtual Laboratory display,and the host computer.

The control console combines the capabilities ofpiloting the airplane and controlling the simulation.The pilot’s controls of the first RDE, designed for theCivil Tiltrotor program, consist of a three-axis handcontroller for attitude control and a thrust control leverfor control of the power. The console also containspush buttons that may be used as pilot controlswitches or as simulation configuration switches.When the RDE is used within the VMS complex, thefacility’s out-the-window image generators canprovide the pilot’s front view.

The capabilities of Virtual Lab (page 34) enablethe customized arrangement of most of the displaysprovided in a VMS lab during a full simulation. Thisunified display typically includes the primary flightdisplay, an aircraft systems display, a simplified out-the-window graphic, and a side view of the aircraft.

The model development environment is compat-ible with the VMS since it uses the same computers,operating systems, simulation executives, modelsupport libraries, aircraft model interfaces, and userinteractions.Development

Development of the RDE included procuringsystem components, providing the functionalities ofthe development environment, and integrating andvalidating the system.

Certain areas required extensive development dueto the essential differences between the VMS and theRDE. A major data communications developmentprovided real-time timing and pilot controls in a muchsimpler manner than that required for VMS simula-

tions. Rather than employing the extensive net-worked system required by the VMS cockpits andlaboratories, hardware and software developmentenabled direct data communication between theconsole components and the simulation computer.

The thrust control lever was entirely designed andfabricated at the VMS. In addition to the basic controlof thrust, the device contains several trim anddiscrete signal buttons integrated into an ergonomi-cally designed controller. The control console con-tains 48 push buttons and supporting electronic logicfor signal conditioning of the three-axis controller andits associated trim and logic switches.Future Plans

This new ability to develop VMS-compatibleaircraft models at remote sites is expected to reducethe time and lower the cost of developing researchexperiments prior to full simulation at the VMS. TheCivil Tiltrotor program is currently using the RDE forongoing development of the aircraft model, flightdisplays, and pilot controls for the program’s simula-tions.

Development TeamWilliam Cleveland, Dale Worth, NASA Ames Re-search Center; Michael Izrailov, Bosco Dias, T. MartinPethtel, Russell Sansom, Philip Tung, Logicon/LISS

The Remote Development Environment gives researcherstools for developing and evaluating aircraft models in asimulation environment; these models can then beimported directly into the VMS system.


Rapid Integration Test Environment

SummaryThis project developed procedures and infrastruc-

ture to facilitate importing aeronautical data fromother research facilities into the VMS Complex. Thisstreamlined process was then demonstrated byimporting data derived at a computational fluiddynamics facility into the VMS and simulating anadvanced fighter aircraft with the updated database.Introduction

Aeronautical design involves generating data in anumber of phases, which may include heuristicmethods, computational fluid dynamics (CFD), windtunnels, and flight tests. Converting the data into ausable form and integrating them into a simulationfor testing can be a lengthy process. Rapid Inte-gration Test Environment (RITE) was conceived as ameans to expedite the inclusion of data from otherresearch facilities into the VMS.Development

This first phase of RITE focused on developing thecapabilities necessary to import data created usingCFD technology into the simulations at the VMS.Software was written to merge data from differentsources and to convert the data to the Function TableProcessor (FTP) format used in the VMS. Proce-dures were developed to transfer data, via theDarwin network, to the VMS.Demonstration

To test and demonstrate the effectiveness of theprocess, the RITE project was to utilize CFD-derivedaerodynamic data in a simulation of the AdvancedShort-Takeoff/Vertical-Landing (ASTOVL) aircraft.This single-engine, powered-lift strike fighter model,developed at Ames and simulated previously at theVMS, features advanced integrated controls, guid-ance, and displays.

The basic lift, drag and pitching moment werecomputed by solving the inviscid Euler equations on

a three-dimensional Cartesian grid for several values ofangle-of-attack. These data were used to correct thecorresponding sets of coefficients calculated using aless accurate but less computationally intensive vortex-lattice method. The corrected data were then convertedto the FTP format and uploaded to a Darwin web site,from which the VMS engineer downloaded them forinstallation in the simulation. The data were thentransferred to the simulation host computer, processedby the FTP, and linked with the simulation.

After incorporating the new data, fixed-base, pilotedsimulation comparisons were made between thebaseline simulation model from 1997 and the two setsof aerodynamic data updated using CFD. Flight tasksinvolved operations on a short-takeoff-and-landing(STOL) runway and aboard an LPH assault ship.Results

This test successfully demonstrated the effective-ness of the RITE process, integrating otherwiseseparate design phases in order to streamline theaeronautical design process. The VMS efficientlyimported data from another research facility, incorpo-rated the data, and simulated three variations of anaircraft model. Differences were observed in theaircraft’s top speed, trim angle-of-attack, and trimcanard setting. As expected, little difference wasseen in the longitudinal handling qualities due to therobust control system of the subject aircraft.

The procedures and infrastructure established inthe RITE project can also be used to transfer datagenerated by wind tunnels or flight test, via Darwin,into simulation experiments at the VMS.

Development TeamNeal Chaderjian, Karen Gundy, Craig Hange, TerryHolst, Julie Mikula, David Kinney, Mary Livingston,Shishir Pandya, Joan Walton, NASA ARC; JorgeBardina, Caelum Research; John Bunnell, WilliamChung, Ron Gerdes, Robert Morrison, Logicon/LISS

This project developed a streamlined process for importing data into the VMS from other aeronautical research facilities.A demonstration imported CFD data (illustrated at left) into the VMS to modify the simulated vehicle (right).


SummaryThe VMS Modernization project will increase the

reliability and maintainability of the VMS by replacingmajor system elements using improved designs andmodern components.Background

The VMS is the largest amplitude flight simulator inthe world and provides unparalleled high-fidelitymotion. Since the first simulation in 1981, the VMShas become the premiere motion flight researchsimulation facility in the country and has filled ademanding two-shift schedule. The exemplaryperformance of the VMS is now threatened due to itshigh use and aging components. While maintenanceand repair costs are rising, system reliability is falling.Numerous electrical and electronic components ofthe VMS are out of date, and some replacementcomponents are no longer available. Mechanicalcomponents and drives are also showing signs ofwear and are nearing the end of their design life.

Simulation is a low-cost alternative to the ever-increasing high cost of aircraft testing and trainingresearch. Hence, the aeronautical industry is turningmore and more to cost-effective simulation to fulfill itstesting and research requirements. Since its incep-tion, the VMS has been the benchmark for large-amplitude motion, and the VMS modernizationproject will keep the VMS at the forefront of simula-tion.Project Phases and Milestones

The project is divided into the following phases:• Management Planning• Studies• Maintenance Requirements Documentation• Design• Procurement• Construction• Installation• Test and VerificationTo minimize the impact to the simulation schedule,

the period for installation and verification will be keptas short as possible.System Improvements

The major system improvements will include:• Motion Drives—electrical, mechanical, and

control work on all six axes of motion

VMS Modernization

• Motion Drive Power—installation of new trans-formers, switchgear, and solid-state componentsto replace the power distribution system andmotor-generator set

• Control System—programmable, digital controlsystem to replace the analog and relay controlsystems

BenefitsThe VMS Modernization is projected to result in

many benefits:• 25% reduction in maintenance costs• 30% increase in peak accelerations• 50% increase in bandwidth• Improved overall system fidelityThe VMS Modernization project affects one of the

nation’s premier aeronautical research facilities. Withthese improvements, the VMS will continue to serveto its full potential in the years to come.

See http://vmsproject.arc.nasa.gov/vms1.html formore information.

An extensive project at the VMS will modernize power,drive, and control components to increase reliability andmaintainability.


Flight Management System Upgrade

This upgrade enables the evaluation of systemimprovements to include curved segments and variablefinal approach lengths in approach procedures.

SummaryThe Flight Management System avionics software

in the Advanced Concepts Flight Simulator continuesto be upgraded to support ongoing advanced air-space operations and automation research at Ames.This year’s development effort focused on providingadditional capabilities to support advanced terminalapproach procedures using curved segments and aVariable Final Approach Length function.Introduction

The Flight Management System (FMS) in amodern glass-cockpit transport aircraft is an on-boardcomputing system that greatly simplifies flight plan-ning, navigation, and guidance aspects of piloting anaircraft. This system, which has become indispens-able for long-distance and oceanic flights, can still becumbersome for terminal-area operations when thepilot workload is generally higher. This is partly due toa dated user interface, but mainly due to the compli-cated keystroke inputs and response verificationrequired for effecting flight plan modifications.

Any improvements in clearance entry automation

will have welcome benefits in reducing pilot workloadas well as eliminating the possibility of pilot entryerrors. From the Air Traffic Controller perspective, theAmes-developed Center TRACON AutomationSystem (CTAS) assists in optimally scheduling arrivaltraffic both in terms of maximizing capacity of thedestination runways and providing the most efficientroute for a given aircraft. The arrival and approachroute structures must be flexible for effectiveinteroperability.Development

The Variable Final Approach Length (VFAL) is oneof the mechanisms being researched at Ames toprovide variable approach length routes to therunway. This is accomplished by utilizing a combina-tion of curved and straight length segments. TheCTAS algorithms would typically define this route fora given aircraft based on other arriving traffic. Thisroute-change information would then be sent to theFMS via datalink.

The FMS development project has provided thealgorithmic and software modifications to let the FMShandle approach procedures that include embeddedVFAL segments. A prototype for this FMS functionwas initially developed in the miniACFS developmentsystem and then integrated and verified in one of thesimulator configurations.

Several other lateral and vertical flight planningimprovements have also been implemented basedon the pilot feedback from the CTAS/FMS Data Linkstudy completed in the past year.Results

The terminal-area approach procedure enhance-ments to the FMS will allow the experimenter widerflexibility in approach design. This function, combinedwith associated cockpit datalink features beingdeveloped, will be used in a follow-on study of theCTAS/FMS Data Link study.

Development TeamRamesh Panda, ManTechMietek Steglinski, Steglinski Engineering


Martian Airplane Visualization

In 2003, the Kitty Hawk will be released from a Martianprobe to record data in multiple formats.

SummaryValles Marineris, the Grand Canyon of Mars, will

be explored by aircraft on December 17, 2003. Thecraft’s mission is to help scientists determine how thecanyons formed and subsequently evolved. A virtualreality demonstration of this flight was created toallow visualization of the craft’s journey.Introduction

The Mars Airborne Geophysical Explorer (MAGE)has been proposed to NASA’s Discovery Program forlaunch in May, 2003. The MAGE aircraft, Kitty Hawk,would carry a payload of gravity, magnetic, andelectric field sensors; an infrared imaging spectrom-eter; and a laser altimeter. It would also carry still andvideo cameras on the 3-hour, 1100-mile flight overthe canyons.

Valles Marineris (Mariner Valley) is a valley systemthat dwarfs the Grand Canyon of Earth by a factor often or more. It reaches depths of 10 miles and widthsof 100 miles. The Kitty Hawk will fly under its ownpower for a few hours, radioing pictures to a probe inMars orbit, and then it will crash.Performance

An aircraft visual model and a visual terraindatabase were developed for use on the Flight SafetyVital VIIIi visual system. The Mars aircraft was madeselectable on either the B747-400 Flight Simulator orthe Advanced Concepts Flight Simulator from theExperimenter Operator Station.

The terrain database contains a 400-by-400 milesection of the Valles Marineris and was compiledfrom data collected on the Viking missions. A sampledata set was extracted from the Mars Digital Eleva-tion Model created by the U.S. Geological Survey.The database has a grid spacing of approximately 10miles.

The terrain was covered with geo-specific texturemaps. The texture was taken from Viking picturesthat have been orthorectified (mapped to actual Marscoordinates). With a resolution of 1.28 miles perpixel, the texture maps look best from above 20,000feet, which meets the requirements for the high-flying

Mars airplane. The San Francisco Airport model wasadded to the database to provide a familiar object toaid in the correct perception of the size of the VallesMarineris.Results

One factor identified is the size of the canyon.Valles Marineris is so immense that the aircraftappeared to be standing still even though it wasmoving at 300 knots.

The landscape is also variable. If the aircraft fliesfrom the top of the canyon wall until it is over thebottom of the canyon, the distance traveled is only 25miles, but the elevation drops 4 miles. If the aircraftflies another 25 miles, a ridge measuring 13,000 feetappears.

DeveloperDavid Brown, ManTech


Navigational Database Upgrade

Visual Omni-Directional Ranges (VORs) are just oneelement that can be automatically updated as a result ofthe Navigational Database Upgrade.

SummaryThe purpose of the Navigational Database Up-

grade is to create an automated process for compil-ing the three navigational databases utilized by theAdvanced Concepts Flight Simulator. All requireddata for the continental U.S. will be available tocompile up-to-date files for the Navigation Facilities,Flight Management System, and Navigation Display.Introduction

The navigational database of the AdvancedConcepts Flight Simulator (ACFS) must be updatedperiodically to reflect changes in the real world. Forexample, magnetic variation changes over time, andthe database needs to be updated periodically toprevent inconsistencies that would be a source ofproblems in navigation.

Another problem is that changes occur constantlyin the thousands of navigational aids (navaids) thatexist. The ACFS navigational database could not beautomatically updated with the navaid changes

purchased from Jeppesen Sanderson, Inc. The taskof manually updating the navaids for each experi-ment was tedious and time consuming.Performance

This upgrade involved creating a program to readthe updated Jeppesen files, compare them with therecords in the navigational database, and replaceany outdated records. There are separate databasesfor the following systems:1. Navigational Displays—These display Visual

Omni-Directional Ranges (VORs), way points, andairports. Only VORs and way points have beenadded in this upgrade. Airports will be added in alater upgrade.

2. Flight Management System—This system has adatabase of airports and runways. The airportsdatabase is now upgraded automatically. Therunways database will be added in a futureupgrade.

3. Navigational Database—The Auto-Flight Systemuses an Instrument Landing System and markerbeacons for flying the aircraft. This database isnow updated by Jeppesen data.

4. Experimenter Operator Station—This graphicaluser interface (GUI) uses a database to repositionthe aircraft to various airports. The database iscurrently edited by hand and will be upgraded inthe future.

5. Visual System—The Flight Safety Vital VIIIi visualsystem has the capability to build a generic airportgiven the runway length, width, type of lighting,and a few other parameters. The databaseneeded to support this feature will be added in afuture upgrade.

ResultsPhase I of the upgrade was successfully com-

pleted and has added programmability and function-ality to the facility.

Development TeamDavid Brown, John Guenther, ManTech


Air Traffic Control Upgrade

Route Traffic Manager, one of two systems beingconsidered for the Air Traffic Control Upgrade, generatedthis display.

Pseudo Aircraft System configurations are easy togenerate and even easier to understand.

SummaryA number of technologies have been considered

for upgrading the CVSRF’s Air Traffic Control Simula-tor. Two options currently under evaluation are thePseudo Aircraft System and Route Traffic Manager.Introduction

It has been recognized for some time that anupgrade to the Air Traffic Control (ATC) Laboratorywould eventually be required. A project was thereforeinitiated to determine the viable possibilities. Optionsfrom rehosting the original application up to andincluding acquiring an entirely new simulation areunder examination. As part of an ongoing investiga-tion of suitable technologies, two candidate systemshave been examined and used with actual experi-ments. These are the Pseudo Aircraft System (PAS)and Route Traffic Manager (RTM).Performance

PAS configurations consist of a number of compo-nents, including controller displays and pseudo-pilotstations. The components can be configured using arelatively simple graphical interface that automaticallygenerates and saves the information required to runthe components as an integrated system.

It is possible to run multiple, independent PASsessions in or out of the ATC Lab, which enables the

simultaneous execution of several experiments. Theultimate goal is to provide for interoperability with anysimulator that implements High Level Architecture(HLA) software.

Current versions of PAS do not have the capabilityof providing realistic ground traffic. RTM has capabili-ties that PAS lacks and is capable of providing acertain amount of rudimentary airborne traffic simula-tion.

PAS and RTM have been integrated with thesimulator visual systems to the point where extremelycomplex patterns of airborne or ground traffic withindependent and intricate behavior patterns can beproduced for a given simulation. Initial indications arethat investigators have minimal trouble designingcomplex traffic scenarios for experiments with eitherPAS or RTM.Results

Both PAS and RTM have now been used duringactual experiments with generally satisfactory results.There are a number of areas that require improve-ment, and the question of integrating air and groundtraffic operations must still be addressed. Systemevaluation continues.

Development TeamRod Ketchum, Joseph King, Jr., Ian MacLure, CraigPires, Ghislain Saillant, ManTech


SummaryDuring the Fiscal Year 1999, more than eighty

computer and networking systems were upgraded tomeet NASA Ames Year 2000 Compliance Standardsat the CVSRF.Introduction

All CVSRF computer systems, network systems,and electronic subsystems were evaluated andtested for Year 2000 (Y2K) compliance. As expected,most systems required modification and, in somecases, replacement to meet Ames Y2K ComplianceStandards. The overall project was separated intothree smaller, more manageable projects.

The B747-400 simulator required an upgrade ofthe proprietary CAE Inc. software. This project wasaccomplished through a contract with CAE, thesimulator manufacturer, and is documented else-where in this report.

The CVSRF Air Traffic Control (ATC) Laboratoryrequired a major upgrade to the Digital VAX com-puter system to meet Y2K Compliance Standards.Due to the scope of this effort and to other limitationswith the aging ATC Lab, a project was initiated toreplace the current ATC with a Y2K-compliant ATCbased on the Pseudo Aircraft System (PAS). Thisproject is also documented elsewhere in this report.

CVSRF Year 2000 Compliance Upgrades

This write-up addresses the third project, whichentailed the procurement and integration of newnetworking equipment, computers, and operatingsystem upgrades.Performance

The most extensive upgrade of this project was tothe CVSRF Ethernet network. This required changingthe central router and Ethernet hub. The manufac-turer of the existing Alantec router would not supporta Y2K upgrade. The router was replaced with a CiscoCatalyst 5500 Switch with an internal RSM RouterModule. This provides all of the functionality of theprevious system and allows for future growth. Aphased plan was followed in integrating the Catalyst5500 to minimize network downtime as well as to testnew and existing networks. The Catalyst 5500 wasordered in August 1998, was installed in October1998, and finished migration in January 1999.

Other computer Y2K upgrades included thefollowing systems:• 50 Silicon Graphics, Inc. Systems• 3 IBM RS-6000 Systems• 2 SUN Systems• 3 ASTi Aural Cue/Communications Systems• 2 Xylogics Terminal Servers• 2 Flight Safety International (FSI) Vital VIIIi Visual

System Motorola Computers• 4 IBM Personal Computers• 40 Apple Macintosh Computers

The largest single operating system upgrade wasthe installation of the IRIX 6.5 in the 50 SGI computersystems.Results

Verification and validation in accordance with theAmes Y2K Compliance Standards were successfullyaccomplished. When appropriate, vendor Y2Kcompliance certificates and Y2K test results wererequested and verified. The NASA-developedAdvanced Concepts Flight Simulator was verified inhouse by performing time warp tests according toAmes Y2K testing standards.

Development TeamCraig Pires, Terry Duncan, ManTech

Numerous computer and networking systems at the CVSRFwere upgraded in preparation for the year 2000.


Acronyms

AATT ..................................................... Advanced Air Transportation TechnologiesACAH .................................................... attitude command/attitude holdACFS .................................................... Advanced Concepts Flight SimulatorAGIE ..................................................... Air-Ground Integration ExperimentAFDD .................................................... Aeroflightdynamics Directorate, U.S. ArmyAPU....................................................... auxiliary power unitARAT ..................................................... Advanced Route Assessment ToolARC ...................................................... Ames Research CenterASTi ...................................................... Advanced Systems Technology IncorporatedASTOVL ................................................ advanced short takeoff/vertical landingATC ....................................................... Air Traffic ControlATTC ..................................................... Aviation Technical Test CenterB747 ...................................................... Boeing 747CDA ...................................................... concept demonstrator aircraftCDTI ...................................................... Cockpit Display of Traffic InformationCFD....................................................... computational fluid dynamicsCTAS ..................................................... Center TRACON Automation SystemCTR....................................................... Civil TiltrotorCVSRF .................................................. Crew-Vehicle Systems Research FacilityDASE .................................................... dynamic aeroservoelasticDIMSS................................................... Dynamic Interface Modeling and Simulation SystemsDOD ...................................................... Department of DefenseDOF ...................................................... degree of freedomDVE....................................................... degraded visual environmentEMM...................................................... electronic moving mapFAA ....................................................... Federal Aviation AdministrationFAATC ................................................... Federal Aviation Administration Technical CenterFAST ..................................................... Final Approach Spacing ToolFB ......................................................... fixed-baseFMS ...................................................... Flight Management SystemFTP ....................................................... Function Table ProcessorGPS ...................................................... Global Positioning SystemGTMS.................................................... Ground Taxi Motion SicknessGUI ........................................................ graphical user interfaceHelMEE ................................................. Helicopter Maneuver Envelope EnhancementHLA ....................................................... High Level ArchitectureHSCT .................................................... High-Speed Civil TransportHSR ...................................................... High-Speed ResearchHUD ...................................................... head-up displayICAB...................................................... Interchangeable CabIFPCS ................................................... Intelligent Flight and Propulsion Control SystemIFR ........................................................ instrument flight rulesISO ........................................................ International Organization for StandardizationJSC ....................................................... Johnson Space CenterJSF........................................................ Joint Strike FighterJSHIP .................................................... Joint Shipboard Helicopter Integration ProcessLASCAS ................................................ Limited-Authority Stability and Control Augmentation SystemLHD ....................................................... Landing Helicopter DeckLISS ...................................................... Logicon Information Systems and ServicesLPH ....................................................... Landing Platform DockMAGE ................................................... Mars Airborne Geophysical ExplorerNASA .................................................... National Aeronautics and Space Administration


NASA ARC ............................................ NASA Ames Research CenterNTPS .................................................... National Test Pilot SchoolOFZ ....................................................... Obstacle Free ZonePAS ....................................................... Pseudo Aircraft SystemPCA....................................................... Propulsion Controlled AircraftPERCLOS ............................................. Percent ClosedPNVS .................................................... Pilot Night Vision SensorPWSC ................................................... Primary Weapons Systems ConceptRASCAL................................................ Rotorcraft Aircrew Systems Concepts Airborne LaboratoryRAT ....................................................... Route Assessment ToolRDE ...................................................... Remote Development EnvironmentRITE ...................................................... Rapid Integration Test EnvironmentRNAV .................................................... area navigationRNP ...................................................... Required Navigational PerformanceROTO .................................................... roll-out and turn-offRTM ...................................................... Route Traffic ManagerSCAS .................................................... stability and control augmentation systemSGI ........................................................ Silicon Graphics, Inc.SimFR ................................................... Simulation Fidelity RequirementsSJSU ..................................................... San Jose State UniversitySSV ....................................................... Space Shuttle VehicleSTOVL .................................................. short takeoff/vertical landingT-NASA ................................................. Taxiway Navigation and Situation AwarenessTAL ........................................................ Transoceanic Abort LandingTAP ....................................................... Terminal Area ProductivityTCAS .................................................... Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance SystemTCP/IP .................................................. Transmission Control Protocol/Internet ProtocolTERPS .................................................. Terminal ProceduresTRACON ............................................... Terminal Radar Approach ControlU.K. ....................................................... United KingdomVFAL ..................................................... Variable Final Approach LengthVLAB ..................................................... Virtual LaboratoryVMS ...................................................... Vertical Motion SimulatorVOR ...................................................... Visual Omni-Directional RangeVSD....................................................... Vertical Situation DisplayY2K ....................................................... Year 2000


A very brief description of the Aviation Sys-tems Research, Technology, & SimulationDivision facilities follows. More detailed informa-tion can be found on the world wide web at:http://www.simlabs.arc.nasa.gov

Boeing 747-400 Simulator

This simulator represents a cockpit of one ofthe most sophisticated airplanes flying today.The simulator is equipped with programmableflight displays that can be easily modified tocreate displays aimed at enhancing flight crewsituational awareness and thus improvingsystems safety. The simulator also has a fullydigital control loading system, a six degree-of-freedom motion system, a digital sound andaural cues system, and a fully integratedautoflight system that provides aircraft guidanceand control. It is also equipped with a weatherradar system simulation. The visual displaysystem is a Flight Safety International driven bya VITAL VIIIi. The host computer driving thesimulator is one of the IBM 6000 series ofcomputers utilizing IBM’s reduced instruction setcomputer (RISC) technology. An additional IBM6000 computer is provided solely for the pur-pose of collecting and storing data in support ofexperiment studies.

The 747-400 simulator provides all modes ofairplane operation from cockpit preflight toparking and shutdown at destination. Thesimulator flight crew compartment is a fullydetailed replica of a current airline cockpit. Allinstruments, controls, and switches operate asthey do in the aircraft. All functional systems ofthe aircraft are simulated in accordance withaircraft data. To ensure simulator fidelity, the747-400 simulator is maintained to the highestpossible level of certification for airplane simula-tors as established by the Federal AviationAdministration (FAA). This ensures credibility ofthe results of research programs conducted inthe simulator.

Advanced Concepts Flight Simulator

This unique research tool simulates a genericcommercial transport aircraft employing manyadvanced flight systems as well as featuresexisting in the newest aircraft being built today.The ACFS generic aircraft was formulated andsized on the basis of projected user needsbeyond the year 2000. Among its advancedflight systems, the ACFS includes touch sensi-tive electronic checklists, advanced graphicalflight displays, aircraft systems schematics, aflight management system, and a spatializedaural warning and communications system. Inaddition, the ACFS utilizes side stick controllersfor aircraft control in the pitch and roll axes.ACFS is mounted atop a six degree-of-freedommotion system.

The ACFS utilizes SGI computers for the hostsystem as well as graphical flight displays. TheACFS uses visual generation and presentationsystems that are the same as the 747-400simulator’s. These scenes depict specific air-ports and their surroundings as viewed at dusk,twilight, or night from the cockpit.

Air Traffic Control Laboratory

The Air Traffic Control (ATC) environment is asignificant contributor to pilot workload and,therefore, to the performance of crews in flight.Full-mission simulation is greatly affected by therealism with which the ATC environment ismodeled. From the crew’s standpoint, thisenvironment consists of dynamically changingverbal or data-link messages, some addressedto or generated by other aircraft flying in theimmediate vicinity.

The CVSRF ATC Laboratory is capable ofoperating in three modes: stand-alone, withoutparticipation by the rest of the facility; single-cabmode, with either advanced or conventional cabparticipating in the study; and dual-cab mode,with both cabs participating.

AppendixSimulation Facilities


Vertical Motion Simulator Complex

The VMS is a critical national resource sup-porting the country’s most sophisticated aero-space R&D programs. The VMS complex offersthree laboratories fully capable of supportingresearch. The dynamic and flexible researchenvironment lends itself readily to simulationstudies involving controls, guidance, displays,automation, handling qualities, flight decksystems, accident/incident investigations, andtraining. Other areas of research include thedevelopment of new techniques and technolo-gies for simulation and the definition of require-ments for training and research simulators.

The VMS’ large amplitude motion system iscapable of 60 feet of vertical travel and 40 feetof lateral or longitudinal travel. It has six inde-pendent degrees of freedom and is capable ofmaximum performance in all axes simulta-neously. Motion base operational efficiency isenhanced by the Interchangeable Cab (ICAB)system. These five customizable cabs simulateASTOVL vehicles, helicopters, transports, theSpace Shuttle orbiter, and other designs of thefuture. Each ICAB is customized, configured,and tested at a fixed-base development stationand then either used in place for a fixed-basesimulation or moved on to the motion platform.

Digital image generators provide full colordaylight scenes and include six channels,multiple eye points, and a chase plane point ofview. The VMS simulation lab maintains a largeinventory of customizable visual scenes with aunique in-house capability to design, developand modify these databases. Real-time aircraftstatus information can be displayed to both pilotand researcher through a wide variety of analoginstruments, and head-up, head-down or hel-met-mounted displays.

For additional information, please contact

A. D. JonesAssociate Chief, Simulations

Aviation Systems Research, Technology, & Simulation Division

(650) 604-5928E-mail: [email protected]

Flight Simulation Year in Review FY99

Documents