MLA Vancouver 8 October 2008 Qualification of military flight simulators The Dutch approach Hans Jansen National Aerospace Laboratory NLR Herman Koolstra.

MLA

Vancouver 8 October 2008Vancouver 8 October 2008

Qualification of military flight simulators

The Dutch approach

Hans Jansen National Aerospace Laboratory NLR

Herman Koolstra Military Aviation Authority MAA-NLD

Chinook in brown out conditions

• A Chinook in a brown out condition– Very common in Uruzghan– Hard to train at home– Limited resources for training

• Can it be trained in a simulator?• Can it be trained completely in a

simulator?• What kind of simulator to

prevent…..3

4

Military Aviation Authority -NLD

• Why a Military Aviation Authority?– Separate inspection and execution

• Tasks• Develop standards• Certification• Inspection (audits)

• Our task: – Make standards for all Military Flight

Simulators

5

Objective: maximize training value

• To reach the objective two fundamental problems must be investigated.

• 1. What is the level of simulation

required for a task to train that particular task completely in an FSTD?

• 2. What is the minimum acceptable level (no negative training) and how much training can be done on that particular simulator.

JAR Flight Simulator Training Devices (FSTD)

• Full Flight Simulator (FFS)– level A B,C D

• Flight Training Device (FTD)– level 1,2,3

• Flight & Navigation Procedures Trainer (FNPT)– level I, II, III,MCC

• Basic Instrument Training Device (BITD)

A Full Flight Simulator level D is the FSTD with the highest fidelity level, and the Basic Instrument Training Device has the lowest level, but sufficient for instrument training.

Limitations of the JAR-FSTD

• Requirements not clearly coupled to flying tasks

• Rigid qualification– lowest subsystem determines

qualification of the simulator

• Training credits not always indicated

• No military tasks

Proposed solution

• Task oriented

• Sub system oriented- Human perception or

technology driven?

9

Task oriented

10

Task

Ground operations

Start up

Taxi

Normal flight ops

Take off

Climb VMC

Instrument departure

Level flight (medium level navigation IMC)

Level flight (medium level navigation VMC)

Level flight (low level navigation)

Instrument approach

Descent

Hover

Landing (on controlled airfield)

Landing under adverse weather conditions (snow/rain)

Slope landings

Special operations

Autorotation

Mountain operations

Cross wind landings

Brown out landings

White out landings

Engine related emergency procedures

System related emergencies

Landing related emergencies

Military operations

Hoisting

Slung load operations (also civil)

Roping operations

Deck landings

NVG operations

A/G gunnery (= all weapon delivery)

Escape manoeuvres

Nap of Earth (NOE) flying

Multi-ship operation

Subsystem oriented

• Instructor/operator station• Visual system (image, FOV)• Motion system (envelope, phase)• Sound system• Cockpit• Performance & Control• Aircraft subsystems• Avionics• Weather• ATC / C2• Threats & targets• cooperative models• Integration & Correlation

11

Basis for standards (1)

• What is required for full 100% compatibility

• Human limitations– Forward compatibility– Independent of present day

technology

12

Different fidelity

13

Basis for standards(2)

• What is the required minimum standard to do any training at all?

• JAR• Little evidence

14

Euclid 11.1 MASTER

Errors in aerobatic training depending on previous

PC training

15

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

Control X 1 X 2

Err

ors

How does it look

Simulator subsystem Hardware / Software

Levels

Instructor station H 2 Visual H 3 Field of View H 5 Motion H 3 & +0.5 Motion Phase H/S 3 Sound H 4 Cockpit H 3 Performance & control S 3 Aircraft Subsystems S 3 Avionics S 3 & +0.5 Weather S 3 & +0.5 ATC / C2 S 4 Threats & Targets S 2 Cooperative models S 2 Integration & Correlation S 3 & +0.5 +0.5 means “in addition above the level itself”

16

How does it look

17

Qualification

Level

General Technical Requirements

Field of View

1 FOV 45ºH x 30ºV per pilot (=JAR level A)

2 FOV 150ºH x 40ºV per crew, continuous (=JAR level C)

3 FOV 150ºH x 60ºV per crew, continuous

4 FOV 180ºH x 60ºV per crew, continuous (=JAR level D)

5 FOV identical with FOV from the pilot station

of the simulated aircraft.

Training value

• How much training value?– first conservative allowance– adjusted, based on experience

Task list ( a piece)

• Rating tasks.– Checklist– Expertise– Confirmation in a FSTD, main reason

for subjective tests as well.

19

Checklist example

• Task qualification checklist ( for 100%): • Motion:

– Is the task high gain or are motion inputs primary triggers: Minimum level 1

– Is the movement also multi axis: minimum level 2.– Does the task require aircraft vibration cues:

minimum level is 3.– If level 2 or 3 motion is required phase difference

should be less than 60 degrees during typical task execution. Phase difference of less than 30 degrees is required for 100% flight replacement.

20

Example score

21

Operators benefits

• Each FSTD can be used.• The training per FSTD can be

optimized.• Flight training can be optimized.

22

Way ahead

• Initial step is completed– FSTD-H

• Second step– qualification

• Third step– fixed wing.

• Continuing effort– Improve the system– Biggest challenge the minimum level

23

Question time

24