• They identified 18 human factors topics unique to UA, separated into 4 main topic areas
1. Automation Issues flight control, degraded reliability, see-and-avoid automation, takeoff and landing automation.
2. Pilot Interface Issues control interface options, data requirements, display augmentation, multimodal displays, display and control standardization, pilot decision-making.
3. Air Traffic Management Procedural Issues Control handoffs, data-link delays, data-link loss.
4. Crew Qualifications.
5. Crew size, KSA requirements, training requirements, training qualifications, medical qualifications.
A ranking was performed on those issues thought to have the highest priority for the FAA
• Five issues were selected for further study in 2006.
1. Whether and how much experience piloting a manned aircraft should be required for UA pilot certification, and whether this requirement should vary across UA types.
2. Assess and compare the effectiveness and human performance of the variety of existing interface designs and explore possible future designs.
3. Assess air traffic controllers’ and UA operators compensatory responses to time delays in communication, and to determine the impact of communication delays on air traffic flow.
4. Define what the UA should be programmed to do in the case of a total loss of GCS-UA control loop communications
5. Determine the desirable and appropriate level of automation for takeoff and landing for a variety of vehicles in civilian airspace.
McCarly and Wickens of the Institude of Aviation of the University of Illinois - Urbana/Champaign in April of 2005 published Human Factors Implications of UAVs in the National Airspace. ( report summary from a similar 2004 study). They point out that mishap rates are several times higher for UAVs operated by the military than for manned missions. As academics, not surprisingly, they recommend further research to:
• Determine the circumstances under which various modes of UAV flight control—fully automated, partially automated, manual—are appropriate.
• Determine whether or not the level of automated flight control should be reconfigurable, such that the operator can alternate between levels of control when he/she deems appropriate.
• Determine whether the reconfiguration of flight control should itself be adaptively automated, such that the UAV system adjusts the level of automated flight control to match the current circumstances (e.g., the current communications delay between UAV and GCS).
• Determine how and when the UAV operator will be allowed to override the automated flight control system.
The result of this work would be a set of rules advising what level of automation should be available/required, during what phases of flight and types of operations.
Hansman and Weibel of the MIT ICAT have published Human and Automated Integration Considerations for UAV Systems.
Brandes Associates Inc. presented Developing Standards for UAS Pilots for the ASTM f-38 Committee at the 2005 CERI UAV HF Workshop.
Simulators are available and will become an important factor just as simulators are currently being adopted to teach first time model aviators the fundamentals of flying miniature aircraft.
