1 / 25

Got Protection?

Explore the adventures in testing a CFIT protection system called eTAWS. Learn about the software algorithm, data inputs, visual and aural cues provided to pilots, and the testing methodology used.

dcrawford
Download Presentation

Got Protection?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Got Protection? Embedded Terrain Awareness Warning System (eTAWS) Adventures in testing a CFIT protection system Maj Cody Allee / Tom Hanrahan

  2. What is eTAWS? A Software algorithm Data inputs come from onboard sensors Velocities and Attitude Height above Terrain - Radar altimeter - MSL altitude minus DTED Provides visual and aural cues to pilot when CFIT is imminent

  3. eTAWS has 2 Goals Protect airplane and crew against CFIT Allow situationally aware pilot to fly missions without getting unnecessary “nuisance” warnings

  4. Trajectories overlaid on terrain

  5. WARNINGS ARE ISSUED WHEN TOTAL ALTITUDE REQUIRED DURING RECOVERY IS GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO HAT ALTITUDE REQUIRED DURING RECOVERY HAT CLEARANCEALTITUDE Recovery Trajectory

  6. Aural Cues Pull-Up Roll Right Roll Left Power Check Gear

  7. vertical trajectory oblique trajectory Visual cue – arrow on HUD

  8. Test Methodology and Approval • Software Testing Complete • Regression and Integration testing • Critical Flight Test Points - 3 Primary areas Inverted 0.95 Mach 0.99 Mach Mountains 30º 45º 50 ft 50 ft

  9. (stop)

  10. OK, Reality… • Need to verify TAWS operation • Can’t kill anyone • Significant data required • Simulation a requirement • No physical risk • Can’t answer all questions • Proof is in the pudding – flight test a must! • Expensive, time-consuming, see #1 above

  11. Test Approach • Basic Software Checks • Simulation • Flight Test • Analysis • Re-Stimulation • Change Software

  12. Why Simulate? Can create pseudo loss of situational awareness Can SAFELY test ability to avoid CFIT Compare performance in simulator with that expected by static eTAWS model Results from CFIT protection testing in simulator have been very similar to those achieved in flight; enhances confidence and sample size. MUCH cheaper and faster!

  13. Why Simulate? (continued) Allow for pilot set-up technique, maintain proficiency during flight test delays System not working? Leaves time prior to flight test for investigation and modifications Check for realistic test points; if the pilot cannot hit the point in the sim, don’t bother testing in flight Some profiles very difficult to achieve in flight, but can be done in the simulator (example: vertical flight)

  14. Why not Simulate? • Well, it’s a simulator • Vehicle motion is artificial • Perfect, when the system may not be • An extra set of assumptions • Pilot cueing different (if not wrong)

  15. Flight Testing • Two Types: • Performance testing • Does the system save me? • Nuisance Cue evaluation • Are there excessive false warnings?

  16. Performance Test • The hard part • How do you dive at the ground but not risk crashing? “The trick to flying is throwing yourself at the ground, but missing…” Douglas Adams

  17. Performance Test • Flying to actual warnings far too dangerous • But, need representative flight conditions • Use a “buffer”, a false altitude signal ! • Makes system think ground higher than it is • Permits flight in similar conditions • Pilot selectable values • Allows for a recovery maneuver if warning is late • Aircraft flies below artificial ground = “crash”

  18. Performance Test w/Buffer • 2 Modes derived • Insert false altitude • Allows pilot to visually correlate obstacles • Provides variable clearance – most realistic • Steeper dives = more clearance required • Build a “false world” into DTED database • Easy to implement • More difficult to judge performance • Less control over terrain clearance

  19. Performance Test - SAFETY Monitor the flights! Displays at ground station Real-time profile information Abort if minimums busted Ensure proper set-up for CFIT protection points Safety chase / Back seat pilot for low level ops

  20. Re-stimulation of test data Record flight test data Analyze data, propose changes Play data back through modified software model Record performance achieved with modified software

  21. Re-stimulation of test data Allowed for faster implementation of software updates - improved system performance - elimination of problems Flight tests___8/00________________12/01_____ Software versions_____5/01_____10/01_____3/02 Number of changes ____7________11________3_

  22. Lessons Learned • Safety Buffer was a flight test enabler • Would never risk flight without • Allowed realistic test • Re-Stimulation provided huge savings • Orders of magnitude faster than flight test • Minimal cost to try variations + same conditions!! • Facilitates rapid software revision

  23. Lessons Learned • Re-Stimulation gave statistical significance • Multiple flights too costly • Actual flight test data used repeatedly = better stats • Non-dedicated flights can be employed

  24. QUESTIONS?

More Related