Activity 6.6 Research: Automatic Takeoff and Landing

6.5 Research: Automatic Takeoff and Landing

Joseph Younts

Embry Riddle Aeronautical University Worldwide

ASCI 638: Shawn Wynn

April 2017

Automatic Takeoff and Landing

            The Boeing 737 is a manned aircraft that is capable of automatic landings at airports that are equipped for specific categories of instrument landing system (ILS) approaches. The various categories of ILS approaches have different visibility minimums, and depending of the requirements and certification of the aircraft, automatic landings are an option available to the pilots. General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc., a manufacturer of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) announced in 2012 that the MQ-9 Reaper had successfully completed 106 full stop automatic takeoff and landing capability (ATLC) landings. For manned aircraft, particularly for commercial airliners, automatic landings have proven to be useful in stressful situations, but the system allows the pilot to simply switch the autopilot off if the pilot wants to hand fly the aircraft to landing.

            The Boeing 737 autolanding features are normally completed during low visibility weather conditions. Autolanding was designed as a safety feature to allow an aircraft to be landed under poor weather conditions in which a conventional approach would be hazardous and insufficient (Autoland, 2015). The autopilot system on the 737 does have a feature that allows the pilot to disengage the autolanding feature in order to hand fly the aircraft in the event that the autolanding feature malfunctions. This procedure ensures that the pilot can be the final authority of the aircraft instead of relying on the aircraft computers to do all the work and function correctly 100% of the time. After an autolanding is completed, the pilot will take over the aircraft in order to taxi the aircraft off the runway and park the aircraft. “Some autoland systems require the pilot to steer the aircraft during the rollout phase on the runway after landing, among them Boeing´s fail passive system on the BOEING 737-700 NG, as the autopilot is not connected to the rudder” (Autoland, n.d., para. 2). The operations for autopilot for the 737 will be covered during training. The 737NG has several failsafe systems in the event that the autoland function fails. If the 2 backup systems fail, the system will recognize the issue and will about the autoland function (Autoland, 2015). This is not so much a limitation as much as it is an excellent design to prevent the aircraft from continuing an approach that the system cannot achieve. The pilot can take the aircraft and hand fly the approach, safely landing the aircraft. This author believes future variants of any Boeing aircraft should have the autoland system that is on the 737NG. The failsafe features on the 737 NG can prevent the approach from being continued while the pilot is alerted.

            The General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper is a UAV that was tested for automatic takeoff and landing capabilities in 2012. In 2012, General Atomics announced that the MQ-9 Reaper successfully completed 106 full-stop automatic takeoff and landings. These automatic takeoff and landings were the first for a multi mission aircraft (Predator B Demonstrates Automatic, 2012). General Atomics has stated that the aircraft was able to track the centerline, decelerate smoothly, and apply reverse thrusters and full brakes at the necessary speeds to slow the aircraft without damaging any systems on the aircraft (Predator B Demonstrates Automatic, 2012). After the 106 takeoff and landings, General Atomics began working to expand the abilities of the MQ-9 Reaper. For more effective takeoffs and landings, the Reaper is being designed to operate in higher winds, carry increased payloads, new GPS enhancements, and terrain avoidance systems with adjustable glideslope abilities (Predator B Demonstrates Automatic, 2012). The system being used on the Reaper has been developed from the Gray Eagle UAS which has over 10,000 automatic takeoff and landings.

            The ability to take off and land automatically would allow Reaper operators to use more runways while taking the control link off the frequency band (Drew, 2016). The senior director of strategic development, Chris Pehrson stated that MQ-9 Reapers have the ability to land on 3,000 foot runways. However, due to the UAV being operated manually from a control station, the Air Force requires an extra 1,000 feet of runway on each end of the runway to increase the safety margins during landings (Drew, 2016). This means the Reaper requires at least 5,000 feet of runway to land during manual operations. However, with the ability to take off and land automatically, the Reaper can land in the same position on the runway consistently, reducing the require amount of runway needed to land. This allows the Reaper to land at more airports around the world if the runway has at least 3,000 feet available for landings (Drew, 2016).

            The information regarding automatic takeoff and landings for the Reaper is scarce, but the design for the system would increase safety if the operator could take over the UAV in the event of a system failure during automatic takeoff and landings. However, the issue that arises with this lies with the length of the runway. If the required amount of runway for manual landings is 5,000 feet, an operator may be put into the position of having to fly to another airport which could be many miles away. Similarly to manned aircraft autopilot systems, the operator should be alerted in the event of a malfunction. This would increase safety and ensure that the aircraft does not crash by itself. In addition to standard training procedures, new and current operators will be required to learn the ins and outs of the abilities of the MQ-9 Reaper when it comes to automatic takeoffs and landings.

            Overall, for both manned and unmanned aircraft, the pilot or operator must understand the abilities of the aircraft in regards to takeoffs and landings. As technology changes, manned aircraft will become capable of automatic takeoffs. This will require aircraft manufacturers to create new fail-safe systems to prevent the aircraft from continuing an approach if there is a malfunction. The pilot or operator should be alerted and allowed to hand fly the approach to ensure a safe landing.

References

Autoland. (2015, July 11). Retrieved from http://www.boeing737pilot.net/autoland/

Autoland. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Autoland

Drew, J. (2016, May 04). USAF to automate MQ-9 takeoffs and landings. Retrieved from     https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/usaf-to-automate-mq-9-takeoffs-and-   landings-               424975/

Predator B Demonstrates Automatic Takeoff and Landing Capability. (2012, September 17).           Retrieved from http://www.ga.com/predator-b-demonstrates-automatic-takeoff-and-landing-capability

Activity 5.5- Research: Shift Work Schedule

5.4- Research: Shift Work Schedule

Joseph Younts

Embry Riddle Aeronautical University Worldwide

ASCI 638: Shawn Wynn

April 2017

Shift Work Schedule

            Fatigue and stress are concepts that are a part of everyone’s lives. Fatigue and stress cannot completely be avoided, especially during aviation related activities. Unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) operators are susceptible to fatigue and stress due to long work shifts, boredom, emotional exhaustion, and burnout. After many hours of continued wakefulness, basic cognitive and physical functions can deteriorate. This is hazardous for UAV flight and is a danger for people on the ground. The United States military will continue to utilize UAVs for surveillance, intelligence gathering, and to carry payloads to use on enemy troops. According to Caldwell (2012), “as fatigue increases, accuracy and timing degrade, lower standards of performance are accepted, the ability to integrate information from individual flight instruments into a meaningful and overall pattern declines, and attention narrows” (Caldwell, 2012, para. 6). In one study conducted on F-117 pilots, when the pilots were deprived one night of sleep and tested on precision instruments, errors based on understanding of the instruments doubled and pilots reported feelings of depression and confusion (Caldwell, 2012). If manned aircraft pilots have these feelings after a single night of sleep loss, what happens to UAV operators when fatigue builds up due to shift work schedules?

            The schedule already provided in this assignment will inevitably lead to fatigue buildup over a short period of time. The teams of operators on the schedule work 6 days on and are off for two days. Each work shift is eight and a half hours. While many professions have work days this long, UAV operators have multiple responsibilities within the ground control station (GCS) that can cause fatigue and stress. In order to reduce the amount of fatigue and stress, the military must first consider the consequences of overworking UAV operators. 6 day work shifts will have a negative impact on the circadian rhythms of the operators. In a study conducted by Thompson, Lopez, Hickey, DaLuz, Caldwell, & Tvaryanas (2006), degradation of reaction times and vigilance performance for UAV operators was greatest over a shift interval for night shifts relative to day and evening shifts. Adverse effects of shift work were most pronounced on day and night shifts relative to evening shifts (Thompson et al., 2006). Part of this issue may be centered around circadian rhythms and the body’s reaction to sleeping during the day and working all throughout the night.

            This author has designed a new schedule that should reduce the amount of stress and fatigue experienced by UAV operators. While a large reduction in stress and fatigue will take time, if the operators are aware of the sources of stress and fatigue, appropriate steps can be taken to mitigate the sources. There is a benefit to the current schedule; having 4 teams helps to keep one team off duty frequently. The new schedule that has been developed is designed to prevent operators from working continuous day, swing, and night shifts. The reasoning behind this schedule change is to give operators plenty of time to recover after a long day. The operators should have time to relax, get adequate amounts of sleep, and spend time with family and friends. Day shifts are from 7:30 A.M. to 4 P.M., swing shifts are from 3:30 P.M. to 12:00 A.M., and night shifts are from 11:30 P.M. to 8:00 A.M. With teams working day shift one day, swing shift the next day, and the night shift the following day, operators have ample amounts of time to recover. With these changes, one team always has a day off while the other 3 teams work day, swing, and night shifts.

            The previous schedule only allowed each team to work 6 days on the same shift. This allows for disruptions in the circadian rhythms of each operator. With this new schedule, each team has a shift 3 days in a row with 1 day off in between the next shift date. Unlike other potential schedules that could have scattered work shifts, each team will work all 3 shifts with a guaranteed full day off. The sequence for this author’s schedule also allows for each team to work 3 shifts, take a day off, and then start the next set of work shifts during the day. By creating this schedule, operators should not have to worry about odd shift work that jumps from day to day. For example, each team will not have to worry about working a night shift, day shift, then a swing shift that could potentially interrupt circadian rhythms. By using this schedule, operators working a day shift will have a sufficient amount of time to relax, spend time with family, and get at least 8 hours of sleep. The same can be said for swing and night shift operators. The disadvantage of this schedule compared to the original schedule is that the shifts do change around every three days. Where the original schedule had consecutive work days, this author’s schedule rotates every day. Some operators may prefer to work 6 days on a specific shift and may feel that their personal fatigue levels are not high with a 6 on 2 off schedule. Another potential issue with both schedules is the shift work itself. Research conducted in 2003 found that in a 32 month study of fatigue and shift work schedules, rotating shift workers fatigue levels were 24 to 29 percent when compared to 18 percent for day shift workers and 19 percent for irregular shift workers (Jansen, Van Amelsvoort, Kristensen, Van den Brandt, & Kant, 2003).

            Overall, this author believes that the original shift work schedule did not allow for operators to have a sufficient amount of time to relax, eat, and achieve recommended amounts of sleep. Operators may also want to exercise and the new shift schedule will give operators that chance. With each team working a day, swing, and night shift in consecutive order, the days off will be spread out and each team can optimize rest time while reducing fatigue through rest and relaxation. While shift work has been identified to have mixed results in regards to fatigue, this shift work schedule should relieve each team of some stress and fatigue throughout the month.

            Below is an example of the schedule I have developed for this research paper. 

References

Caldwell, J. A. (2012, April 24). Crew Schedules, Sleep Deprivation, and Aviation Performance. Retrieved from https://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/releases/crew-schedules-sleep-deprivation-and-aviation-performance.html#.WPfnGvnyvIU

Jansen, N. W. H., Van Amelsvoort, L. G. P. M., Kristensen, T. S., Van den Brandt, P. A., &   Kant, I. J. (2003). Work schedules and fatigue: A prospective cohort study. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 60(Suppl 1), i47-i53.

Thompson, W. T., Lopez, N., Hickey, P., DaLuz, C., Caldwell, J. L., & Tvaryanas, A. P. (2006).        Effects of Shift Work and Sustained Operations: Operator Performance in Remotely Piloted Aircraft (OP-REPAIR). 1-53. Retrieved from http://www.dtic.mil/docs/citations/ADA443145

Activity 4.6 Research: UAS Beyond Line of Sight Operations

Activity 4.6- Research: UAS Beyond Line of Sight Operations

Joseph Younts

Embry Riddle Aeronautical University Worldwide

ASCI 638: Shawn Wynn

April 2017

  

UAS Beyond Line of Sight Operations

            The Global Hawk is a high altitude, long endurance (HALE) unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) designed to collect reconnaissance information. The Global Hawk is used to collect extended reconnaissance which is responsive and sustained data that can be gathered and set back to the operator from anywhere in enemy territory on any given day, regardless of the weather (Pike, n.d.). The Global Hawk can operate at ranges up to 11,000 nautical miles from its home base and fly at altitudes greater than 60,000 feet for over 24 hours at a time (Gibbs, 2015). The Global Hawk has been outfitted with many technologies that make high altitude reconnaissance possible. The Global Hawk carries electro-optical technology, infrared sensors, and synthetic aperture radar and can be flown via line of sight (LOS) operations or beyond line of sight (BLOS) operations (Pike, n.d.). Line of sight operations are possible through the use of data link communications while beyond line of sight operations require the use of Ku-band SATCOM data links for command, control, and communication with the Global Hawk.

            The Global Hawk can be flown all over the world and is not restricted to LOS operations. In order to operate outside normal LOS operations, the Global Hawk was designed to use Ku-Band satellite connections to fly beyond the line of sight. SATCOM systems utilize satellites to allow the Global Hawk operator to use voice and data telecommunications. SATCOM can use geo-stationary or low-Earth orbits to control voice and data telecommunications (Duncan Aviation, 2015). SATCOM has several different parts ranging from space components to ground stations. “The space segment consists of the orbiting satellites and the ground segment is made up of control stations that maintain the satellites’ health in orbit and gateways that provide the interconnecting link to the groundbased telecommunications networks” (Duncan Aviation, 2012, pg. 3).

            The infrastructure for the Global Hawk is relatively simple. The system is made up of the Global Hawk, the payload on the aircraft, a ground control station and mission planning system, and data links that allow the Global Hawk to operate (Northrop Grumman, 2012). The Global Hawk has the ability to take off and land autonomously and can also be put into an autonomous flight mode during cruise settings thanks to a sophisticated mission and flight management system. Due to these autonomous abilities and advances in technology, the crew required to fly the Global Hawk is much smaller than the number of crew members required for other UAS. A smaller crew also means that the crew can provide more on station time than a larger crew required to support a manned aircraft platform (Northrop Grumman, 2012). The mission control element (MCE) is used to provide management of the Global Hawk and its sensors. The MCE controls the aircraft, any data links to the Global Hawk, and payloads being carried. Thanks to the MCE, the Global Hawk can transmit near real time information to operators and commanders at a moment’s notice anywhere in the world. Within the MCE, the crew conducts C3 operations (command, control, and communications), mission planning, and image quality control (Northrop Grumman, 2012).

            The Global Hawk has several support systems that help to safely execute missions. The systems on board the Global Hawk are similar to the support systems on manned aircraft. Processes and management systems used by supplies and maintenance are the same as manned aircraft, but the manuals for the Global Hawk are electronic and have virtual illustrations (Northrop Grumman, 2012). The crew chief has an important role to play during missions. The crew chief is responsible for connecting a vehicle test computer to the aircraft to monitor all systems and components during flight. Another laptop used during missions contains all maintenance manuals needed to troubleshoot any problems (Northrop Grumman, 2012).

            The Global Hawk can effectively operate within visual line of sight of the operator for short missions and beyond visual line of sight for long range, long endurance reconnaissance missions anywhere in the world. BLOS operations are critical because it allows the operator to provide intelligence to soldiers on the ground in near real time. BLOS operations require Ku SATCOM communications with satellites in space while LOS operations simply require the Global Hawk to operate within predefined range for the duration of the flight to maintain line of sight connectivity (Northrop Grumman, 2012). The advantages to BLOS operations include long range flights across the world, long endurance flights that provide critical reconnaissance data to commanders, and rotation of operators to reduce fatigue. The disadvantage to BLOS operations is that collection of data may take long amounts of time due to long range flights. There could also be a delay on transmission of data when the Global Hawk is thousands of miles away from the GCS. BLOS operations would also require each component of the UAV to be working correctly in order for the operator to provide necessary reconnaissance data. During BLOS flight, if the operator needs to put the UAV into manual control mode, a delay on the input of the flight controls could be hazardous to the safety of the flight. Line of sight operations will have higher transmission speeds and in the event of an emergency, it is likely that the operator will be able to land the UAV safely at the home airbase. With LOS operations being much closer to the GCS, there are fewer chances that interference can occur to interrupt the signals between the GCS and the Global Hawk.

            The transition between LOS and BLOS can present several human factors issues. When BLOS operations have been initiated, SATCOM data links have been susceptible to latency issues. Latencies between the GCS and the Global Hawk can make remote piloting become a less feasible option. When remote piloting is no longer an option, autopilots must be turned on because of latencies experienced during BLOS operations (Valavanis, Oh, & Peigl, 2008). Since the Global Hawk is a long endurance UAV, the operator may need to fly the UAV across multiple ATC regions. One ATC procedure for UAS flight across multiple ATC regions is to use the UAV as a communication relay. The relay will allow a ground operator to stay in contact with ATC constantly within specific regions of airspace (Valavanis et al., 2008). If ATC contact with the operator is lost, the ground control station will attempt to re-establish the data link between the GCS and ATC. When the Global Hawk is flying BLOS, the only way to re-establish the data link between the GCS and ATC is by carrying multiple VHF transceivers and having redundant voice communication systems on board (Valavanis et al., 2008). There is a chance that the operator could completely lose contact with ATC, putting the Global Hawk and other aircraft at risk for a midair crash. Another issue when switching between LOS and BLOS could be situational awareness. The final human factor issue that could become a problem is the handoff of the Global Hawk from one GCS to another. If the UAV is handed off to another GCS, situational awareness levels for the receiving operator could be reduced due to flight mode inputs by the previous operator. Checklists for switching between operators should be followed to ensure there is a smooth transition from one GCS to another. The operator handing the UAV off should ensure that aircraft settings and configurations are set in a standard position to prevent the next operator from turning off any critical functions on the UAV.

            According to Northrop Grumman (2012), the Global Hawk is the only UAS to receive both military and NASA airworthiness certificates. In order to receive the airworthiness certificate, the Air Force put the Global Hawk through more than 600 airworthiness test criteria. Each component was tested to meet extreme specification requirements and the Air Force had to verify that each system was safety during all phases of flight (Northrop Grumman, 2012). When the RQ-4 Global Hawk received the airworthiness certificate, the Air Force stated that the Global Hawk would be able to fly safely within the National Airspace System (NAS). The first challenge that will be faced for BLOS operations within the NAS will be regulations that must be developed by the FAA. Amazon is only one business out of many that have plans to use UAVs to deliver packages to customers within a certain distance from shipping warehouses. If Amazon could perform BLOS operations, there would be less congestion on roads which would reduce carbon emissions from vehicles. BLOS operations would be greatly utilized by search and rescue teams, cargo transport services such as Amazon or UPS, crop dusting and agriculture operations, and even natural disaster teams conducting research on damages. These commercial operations are in the near future, especially considering the rapid growth of UAS in the United States and due to the FAA’s roadmap for integration of UAS into the NAS. However, until new regulations are developed and detect, sense and avoid technology is created, commercial operations will continue to be hindered within the United States.  

References

Duncan Aviation. (2012). Straight Talk About Satcom & HSD. Retrieved from             https://www.duncanaviation.aero/files/straight-talk/Straight_Talk-Satcom_HSD.pdf

Gibbs, Y. (2015, March 11). Global Hawk - Performance and Specifications. Retrieved from             https://www.nasa.gov/centers/armstrong/aircraft/GlobalHawk/performance.html

Northrop Grumman . (2012). Q-4 Enterprise [Brochure]. Author.

Pike , J. (n.d.). RQ-4A Global Hawk (Tier II HAE UAV). Retrieved from             https://fas.org/irp/program/collect/global_hawk.htm

Valavanis, K., Oh, P., & Piegl, L. (2008). Unmanned Aircraft Systems International Symposium on Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, Uav-08. Springer Verlag.

Activity 3.4 Research: UAS Integration in the NAS

UAS Integration in the NAS

            Radar systems have long been used in the United States to safety control the movements of aircraft within the National Airspace System (NAS). However, with air traffic increasing in the NAS, the FAA has deemed it necessary to continue development of the Next Generation Air Traffic System (NextGen). NextGen has been in the works for many years, but as time passes, the potential benefits of NextGen continue to push the FAA to finish this new system. NextGen is not a single system; it is made of a series of initiatives that will make the NAS more efficient and safe (Houston, 2016). NextGen was formed in 2000 and officially started in December of 2003. NextGen was designed to be a multi-agency, multi-year modernization of the current, outdated air traffic system (Houston, 2016). The NextGen air traffic system has many benefits. These benefits include better travel experiences, fuel savings for operators, a reduction in emissions due to more direct routes, reduced separation between aircraft due to more accurate systems, reduced congestion, better communications across the NAS, easy access to in flight weather information, and improvements for on board technology (Houston, 2016).

            Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) is a critical component of the NextGen system. ADS-B will affect all segments of aviation. ADS-B will allow pilots and air traffic control to review real time information regarding the airspeeds, headings, altitudes, and other information of various aircraft equipped with ADS-B. With ADS-B, pilots and air traffic control will receive continuous updates from air traffic, allowing pilots and ATC to have unprecedented amounts of situational awareness (NextGen, 2016). With real time updates on other aircraft, both commercial aviation and general aviation will become safer. ADS-B for general aviation will provide pilots with traffic updates, in flight weather information, and access to flight information services. The national airspace system (NAS) is experiencing growth at a rapid rate; ADS-B will increase safety and airspace efficiency for aircraft flying within the national airspace system and for aircraft flying into controlled airspaces. ADS-B will improve safety on the ground and in the air. This technology will also reduce costs for operators due to more direct routing and will also reduce harmful effects on the environment (NextGen, 2016).

            UAS integration into the NAS is already beginning. UAS have become a large part of military and government operations, ranging from the Department of Defense and Homeland Security to all branches of the military for surveillance and bombing missions. UAS are also becoming popular for non-military operations. These operations include border patrol, search and rescue operations, flooding impact studies, and even for erosion and crop damage control (Paczan et al., 2012). Currently, UAS are not to be flown for commercial operations, but UAS operators can operate under a Certificate of Waiver or Authorization. In 2011 Customs and Border Protection utilized the surveillance abilities of the MQ-9 Predator-B to seize more than 7,600 pounds of illegal narcotics (Paczan et al., 2012).

            UAS within the NAS will require special considerations based on data communications and enhanced automation systems. With the NextGen system, there will be enhancements to the two way data communication links shared between aircraft and ATC. Data communications have been designed to provide pilots and ATC with routine and strategic information that will impact the various phases of flight (Paczan, Cooper, & Zakrzewski, 2012). Benefits to data communications include greater amounts of information displayed for pilots in the cockpit, new sophisticated automation tools, smarter, more efficient coordination between ATC and pilots, and less congestion on ATC frequencies (Paczan et al., 2012). Automation systems will streamline operations between ATC and pilots. Automation systems will be critical to the safety of UAS within the NAS because controller workload will increase as the ratio of UAS to manned aircraft increases (Paczan et al., 2012).

            UAS integration into the NAS will face several challenges. Detect, sense, and avoid technology is still rather new, but with ADS-B becoming a requirement for manned aircraft by 2020, ADS-B has been identified as a solution for UAS within the NAS. The limitation for ADS-B usage is that any non-participating aircraft flying within the NAS will not be seen by other aircraft equipped with ADS-B. If UAS are required to have ADS-B, other operators and ATC will have more control over the safety of the NAS. Another challenge for integration of UAS into the NAS will be based around flight plans. Flight plans are an integral component of air traffic operations within the NAS (Paczan et al., 2012). Flight plans allow controllers to safely and effectively manage the various classes of airspace within the NAS. When UAS are being integrated into the NAS, specific contingency routes must be considered before flight. In the event of an emergency, where should a UAV operator fly the unmanned aircraft? Contingency routes are normally pre-programmed into the flight computers on the aircraft, but with unmanned aircraft, there could be hundreds of specific contingency routes. Paczan et al., (2012) suggest having a storage mechanism in place to maintain all contingency routes for a UAV. These routes would have to carry specific activation conditions in the event of an emergency.

            There are other human factors considerations that must be researched before UAS can be integrated into the NAS. This author believes complacency and lack of awareness will be human factors that may play a role in future UAS accidents. Complacency occurs when routine activities become habitual; tasks that are repeated on a daily basis become “easy” and therefore the operator will use muscle memory to fly the UAV. Simple flight routes that are flown repeatedly will cause the operator to become relaxed rather than being alert (The Human Factors, n.d.). Complacency can also occur after a near miss or recovery from a potential disaster. The relief that will be felt by an operator after a potential accident can result in a state of relaxation and reduced situational awareness (The Human Factors, n.d.). In addition to potential accidents, too little pressure can also cause complacency. Too much stress causes fatigue, but too little stress causes complacency. Therefore, some stress can actually be beneficial to the operations of UAV operators.

            Lack of awareness is also a potential hazard to UAV integration into the NAS. “Working in isolation and only considering one’s own responsibilities can lead to tunnel vision; a partial view, and a lack of awareness of the affect our actions can have on other and the wider task” (The Human Factor, n.d., para. 29). Lack of awareness can lead to unnecessary stressors, an increase in the levels of fatigue, and loss of situational awareness, increasing the chances for an accident. While ADS-B will increase awareness for manned aircraft, unless UAVs within the NAS are required to have ADS-B, UAV operators will not be as aware as they should be. ADS-B will also only allow operators to sense other aircraft with ADS-B technology. Unless there is a mandate to have ADS-B on UAVs, non-participating aircraft will be a threat to other manned and unmanned aircraft in the NAS.

            In conclusion, UAVs and NextGen technologies can be integrated to create a more safe and efficient airspace system for UAV usage. UAV operations will continue to grow in the United States, and with this in mind, the FAA must continue to consider how to safely integrate UAVs into the NAS. With ADS-B technology, UAVs should be able to operate within a section of airspace dedicated to for UAVs. However, even with NextGen technology, the FAA must consider what regulations should be developed in order to ensure UAVs have detect, sense, and avoid technology, particularly for commercial operations.

References

Houston, S. (2016, August 14). NextGen in a Nutshell: The Next Generation Air Traffic System. Retrieved from https://www.thebalance.com/nextgen-in-a-nutshell-282561

N. M. Paczan, J. Cooper and E. Zakrzewski, "Integrating unmanned aircraft into NextGen            automation systems," 2012 IEEE/AIAA 31st Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC), 

Williamsburg, VA, 2012, pp. 8C3-1-8C3-9. doi: 10.1109/DASC.2012.6382440

Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen). (2016, October 26). Retrieved from             https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/programs/adsb/

The Human Factors "Dirty Dozen". (n.d.). Retrieved from             http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/The_Human_Factors_%22Dirty_Dozen%22

ASCI 638: 2.4 Research- UAS GCS Human Factors Issue

In this research activity, you will select a UAS GCS of your choice and provide an in depth analysis of its functional operation. Next, identify at least two negative human factors issues associated with its design, and identify solutions to mitigate the risks posed by their existence. Are there any common human factors in your UAS that are also present in manned aircraft?

UAS GCS Human Factors Issue

            The RQ-1 Predator unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) is a long endurance, medium altitude UAV designed for surveillance and reconnaissance missions (Predator RQ-1, n.d.). The predator is equipped with video cameras that utilize synthetic aperture radar to create surveillance imagery that can be distributed in real time to soldiers on the ground, the operational commander, and via satellite communication links (Predator RQ-1, n.d.). All the system controls and UAV abilities are controlled through the use of a ground control station (GCS) which houses the pilot and payload operator and the all computer systems and other critical data gathering systems that allow soldiers to gather detailed surveillance information during flight.

            The ground control station for the Predator UAV is housed within a single 30 foot trailer that contains seating for the pilot and payload operator, the consoles for the pilot and payload operator, three Boeing Data Exploitation and Mission Planning Consoles, and two synthetic aperture radar workstations (RQ-1A/MQ-1 Predator, n.d.). The trailer also contains communications equipment such as satellite and line of sight ground data terminals that relay information back to the operators and soldiers (RQ-1A/MQ-1 Predator UAV, n.d.). The ground control station for the Predator UAV can send surveillance imagery to the operators or to a system called the Trojan Spirit data distribution system. The Predator uses C- and Ku Band datalinks. These datalinks are used for line of sight (LOS) and non-LOS communications with the UAV. Using these datalink systems, the UAV can operate at ranges of about 400 nautical miles (General Atomics RQ-MQ-1, n.d.). The Trojan Spirit System used these datalink systems for data dissemination (RQ-1A/MQ-1 Predator, n.d.).

            The GCS within the 30x8x8 trailer is equipped with an integral uninterrupted power supply and environmental control system. The ground control stations allows the pilot and payload operator to conduct data exploitation, create and conduct mission plans, communicate through DEMPC terminals, and contains synthetic aperture radar workstations (Pike, n.d.). Synthetic aperture radar is a critical component of the predator UAV. This radar system allows the operator to map the Earth around the UAV, monitor the environment, and capture complex information that is used to create high resolution imagery (What is SAR, n.d.). The synthetic aperture radar system within the GCS allows the operator to collect imagery at any time of the day or during any kind of sight blocking atmospheric conditions (What is SAR, n.d.). All images collected during the flight of the Predator are sent to the GCS because the Predator does not have an onboard recording system capability (Pike, n.d.). All power supplied to the ground control station is supplied through dual external generators (Pike, n.d.).

            There are several issues that have been identified with the Predator UAV GCS. First, “Rainman,” a major in the USAF who was the first pilot to fly the Predator in 1995 and spent many hours flying the UAV, discovered one major human factor issue with the GCS. According to Rainman, the RQ-1 Predator UAV GCS operator keyboard had keys that turned the lights on and off and the keys to the engine adjacent to each other.  During high workload situations, an operator could easily mistake the keys to the engine for the keys to the light controls. This could easily lead to the destruction of the aircraft during flight (Conner, Cooke, Pedersen, & Pringle, 2006). Another human factors issue Rainman brought to light was the lack of haptic cues and feedback found in manned aircraft. Where a manned aircraft pilot can feel engine failure or on coming stalls, a Predator operator cannot feel these. Rainman highly suggested that the operator be able to see oncoming failures by accessing menus on the interface within the GCS (Conner et al., 2006).

            The simple solution to both of these problems is to redesign the GCS operator control center. Human factors issues dealing with ergonomics can be solved by simply moving the problem area or redesigning the keys into a different shape. For example, in a Cessna 172, the throttle control and the mixture control are different shapes and feel different when a hand is placed on them. This simple design can prevent a pilot from unintentionally pulling the mixture all the way out when the true intention was to pull the power out. The keys for the lights and the engine should be moved away from each other. If the engine keys are placed on the opposite side of the keyboard or even away from the keyboard completely, the operator should not have to worry about accidently killing the power to the UAV. As for the issue with the operator not being able to feel the sensations that a manned aircraft pilot feels, haptic feedback should be installed so the operator can feel when a stall is beginning to occur. It may also be beneficial for the seats within the GCS to vibrate or rotate and bank based on the flight control inputs made by the operator (Conner et al., 2006).

            Human factors exist in both manned and unmanned aircraft operations. Between both unmanned and manned operations, there are common human factors that exist in relation to each other. Technical flight training exists not only to teach pilots and operators about how to fly an aircraft; it is also about training pilots and operators how to react during emergencies. Training also teaches pilots and operators how to prevent human factors issues from causing an accident. The underlying issue is that during flight operations where workloads are high, it is easy to forget crucial steps that should be taken to ensure the safety of the flight operations.  For example, like manned aircraft pilots, error management in UAV GCS is necessary. Error can be managed through the following ways: avoidance, trapping, and mitigating. The process of avoidance allows the operators to recognize traits that lead to weakness which could lead to potential errors during flight operations. Trapping is the process of identifying an error and minimizing the activity affect by an error (Campbell & Bagshaw, 2002). Finally mitigation is the process of determining the consequences of an error and how they can be reduced by taking specific actions that prevent the development of an error (Campbell & Bagshaw, 2002).

            Similarly to manned aircraft operations, flight crews must utilize several critical steps to ensure human factors errors are reduced. Briefing the flight crew (or operators) before the flight allows each member to identify potential errors. Breaking the error in the chain of events can potentially save an aircraft or lives. Preparation allows the flight crew to prepare for the unexpected. Cambell & Bagshaw (2002) describe this step as staying ahead of the aircraft. By staying one step ahead of the aircraft, fast reactions to hazards can be prevented and more time can be taken to properly analyze a situation. The last step is to perform workload management. By establishing responsibilities, each member of the flight crew can avoid overload (Campbell & Bagshaw, 2002). If the following steps are followed and the operators take time to review the objectives and responsibilities of each crew member, human factors can be reduced and safety levels can be increased.

References

Campbell, R. D., & Bagshaw, M. (2002). Human performance and limitations in aviation (3rd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell Science.

Connor, O., Cooke, N.J., Pedersen, H., & Pringle, H. (2006). Human factors of remotely   operated vehicles. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier Publications.

General Atomics RQ/MQ-1 Predator. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.designation-       systems.net/dusrm/app2/q-1.html

Pike, J. (n.d.). UAV Ground Control Station (GCS). Retrieved from             http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/systems/uav_gcs.htm

Predator RQ-1 / MQ-1 / MQ-9 Reaper UAV. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/predator-uav/

RQ-1A/MQ-1 Predator UAV. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://defense-          update.com/products/p/predator.htm

What is Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR)? (n.d.). Retrieved from    http://www.sandia.gov/radar/what_is_sar/

9.4 Blog: Case Analysis Effectiveness

9.4 – Blog Case Analysis Effectiveness

For your case analysis project you worked collaboratively to research, develop, and present a topic associated with major theme of problems or issues associated with UAS design, operations, or regulations. Discuss the effectiveness of the Case Analysis tool in this course. Focus specifically on the utility of Case Analysis as a tool for decision making and how it has (or does not have) utility in your current line of work, future anticipated career, or past experiences (identify at least two examples). Provide any recommendations for how the process or project (e.g., requirements, format, group interaction, topical focus, etc.) could be improved to better support building and expanding student experience for the eventual or further development of their careers.

            The case analysis designed for this course is an excellent tool to develop a decision making process. This author has never had to complete a case analysis, but after completing the case analysis paper, this author believe his writing skills and critical thinking skills have increased thanks to the layout of the paper. The case analysis paper was broken down into 5 parts; the summary, the issue or problem statement, the significance of the problem, the development of two alternative actions with pros and cons for each alternative, and a unique recommendation to solve the problem. Unlike a standard research paper where the writer simply completes research and writes on the problem, a case analysis requires that the writer spend time thinking about the topic in order to develop well thought out solutions to the problem. A case analysis assists the student by allowing the students to focus on a real issue within the aviation industry while also coming up with unique ways to solve the problem. The real benefit for this author was the development of a unique recommendation to solve the problem. This author chose to write on the lack of detect, sense, and avoid technology to allow full integration of unmanned aerial systems within the National Airspace System. The recommendation section of the case analysis really allowed this author to get creative with a recommendation based on radar systems for UAS. With this recommendation, this author was able to describe the radar system that would solve the issue of UAS not being able to detect, sense, and avoid other aircraft or hazards such as birds or power lines.

            A case analysis allows the student to look at a problem from a different perspective. In the workplace, a worker will not always simply have all the right ideas. There will also be times in which it is important to come up with unique ideas to solve a problem. A case analysis introduces students to these different perspectives. The case analysis paper certainly allowed this author to expand his ideas on the issue of the lack of detects, sense, and avoid technology within UAS computer systems. This author is currently a full time student, so a case analysis has no utility in any job at this point in time. However, this author is an aspiring professional pilot, and the case analysis tool will allow this author to look at a problem and determine alternative actions to solve a problem. During the flight planning process, alternative airports should be chosen in the event of an emergency. Alternative actions must be taken during an emergency during flight. By choosing alternative airports, this author would need to look at the pros and cons of alternative airports. Factors to look at include fuel available, runway lengths, and distances from various positions along the route.

            The overall process of the development of the case analysis for this class is laid out in an orderly fashion. One of the steps in the development of this case analysis project that this author enjoyed completing was the peer reviews for the abstract and rough draft. The first recommendation this author would make to improve the development of the case analysis would be a final peer review of the case analysis during the week it is due. This author greatly appreciated the constructive feedback developed by several classmates. This author took the recommendations into consideration and made changes where applicable. A final peer review of the paper before it is turned in would allow students to gain more confidence after a peer within the same graduate course has reviewed it and made recommendations where necessary. The second recommendation this author would make would be to lower the page requirement for the case analysis. After turning the rough draft in, this author found that he struggled to convey the main points of the paper because of the requirements of meeting the 5 learning outcomes that had to be discussed and having 20 pages of content. This author felt that the message within the case analysis could be well developed in less than 20 pages. In order to reach the 20 page requirement, this author added in more information than what was necessary which made the rough draft confusing and hard to follow. Thanks to the recommendations of the professor and other peers, this author cleaned up the rough draft and was able to convey all the issues, alternative actions, and recommendations for the lack of detect, sense, and avoid technology to facilitate full UAS integration into the NAS. This author greatly appreciates the required development of the case analysis throughout the paper. Unlike many classes where a paper is assigned and has a set date, this course kept this author aware of the project by requiring that work be completed on the paper each week. This fact made the author feel much better about the development of the paper because without weekly work being due for the case analysis, this author would have likely attempted to complete the paper within a few weeks instead of utilizing the entire semester. This author would greatly recommend other courses follow the same format. Weekly completion of parts of the case analysis would keep students on their feet and prevent procrastination. This author also believes that students would walk away from the course better prepared for future courses in the Master’s Degree program.

            This author would like to thank his peers for the excellent recommendations given on the peer review assignments and also for the recommendations and guidance provided by Professor Brazelton during the development of the case analysis.

7.4 Research Paper: Request for Proposal

In this activity, you will develop a response to the following:

Natural disasters such as tornados, hurricanes, and wildfires have a devastating impact on communities where these events occur. Lives are lost, citizens are injured, and infrastructure and property are destroyed. In the aftermath resources are limited, while the response and recovery is hampered by reduced communications and infrastructure damage. Based on this scenario use these high-level base requirements to propose a series of derived/low-level requirements for the design of a UAS down to the element level (e.g., air vehicle element, command & control [C2], payload, data-link [communications], and support equipment) to support response and recovery efforts.

Ensure you include applicable test requirements to verify the system will work as proposed and an associated schedule to perform the required phases of development (e.g., system development, ground testing, and in-flight testing). In addition, develop an overview to identify associated design considerations and decisions for your derived requirements. You are encouraged to locate and examine commercially-off-the-shelf (COTS) components to determine capability associated with the UAS elements for the derived requirements and testing strategy.

Request for Proposal

            Natural disasters have a massive impact on the areas in which the disaster occurs. During natural disasters, lives are lost, people are hurt, and homes, buildings, and infrastructure are damaged or destroyed. In the aftermath of these disasters, response and recovery can be slowed by the limited number of resources available to aid those in need. This request for proposal shall review the major base requirements of transportability, air vehicle elements, and payload for a UAV that is designed for search and rescue operations. During natural disasters, people can easily get lost in all the chaos; in the aftermath, search and rescue teams will come to the aid of these people. By allowing search and rescue teams to utilize unmanned aircraft, search and rescue efforts will become more efficient and areas that cannot be easily reached by ground search and rescue teams can be further explored for missing people. The UAV being developed for this proposal will allow search and rescue personnel to deliver lifesaving materials to the lost people if needed. The UAV will be a quadrotor design that will allow the UAV to takeoff and landing vertically. This function will also allow the operator to thoroughly search an area hit by a natural disaster. The time frame for this UAV will be 2 years in development.

Transportability:

1.1  The entire system (including all elements of the UAV) shall be transportable in a hard, protective case that will weigh less than 50 lbs enabling one person to carry the UAV.

1.2  The hardened case shall have various compartments dedicated for all components for the UAV.

1.3  The hardened case shall be one single case which will enable the entire UAV/control system to be carried at once.

1.4  The hardened case shall be designed to be picked up and carried by a single person or rolled on the ground via a handle with wheels on the case.

1.5  The hardened case shall be designed to withstand a fall from a height of 5 feet with minimal damage to the case.

1.6  The hardened case shall be designed to protect the UAV by absorbing the shock from a fall of 5 feet.

Air Vehicle Elements

1.1  Shall be capable of flight up to 500 feet in altitude above ground level.

1.1.1        The UAV shall climb at a rate of 2 meters per second.

1.1.2        The UAV shall be capable of descending at a rate of 1.5 meters per second.

1.1.3        The UAV shall be capable of operating in temperatures ranging from 0° to 40° C

1.1.4        The UAV shall be capable of flight in sustained winds up to 25 mph.

1.1.5        The UAV shall utilize satellite GPS for precise movements. 

1.2  Shall be capable of sustained flight (at loiter speed) in excess of one hour.

1.2.1        Battery life for the UAV shall exceed two hours of flight time due to a hydrogen fuel cell.

1.2.2        After sustained flight at loiter speeds, the UAV shall return to the operator.

1.3  Shall be capable of covering an operational radius of one mile.

1.3.1        The UAV shall have the ability to operate at distances up to 3 miles.

1.3.2        The UAV shall calculate the distance and fuel required to return to the operator.

1.4  Shall be deployable and on station (i.e., in air over mission area) in less than 15 minutes.

1.4.1    The UAV shall have each component that can easily snap into place.

1.4.2    UAV components shall easily be taken out of the hardened case due to ergonomic fittings for the components.

1.4.3    Shall have a maximum cruising speed of 44 mph depending on wind conditions.

1.5  Shall be capable of manual and autonomous operation.

1.5.1        The operator shall control the UAV when necessary.

1.5.2        The operator shall use the autonomous functions when necessary.

1.5.3        Autonomous operation shall be programed into the control station when manual operations are not being utilized.

1.5.4        Specific flight patterns shall be integrated into the systems on the UAV for thorough coverage of an area.

1.6  Shall provide capture of telemetry, including altitude, magnetic heading, latitude/longitude

position, and orientation (i.e., pitch, roll, and yaw).

1.6.1        UAV data shall be sent back to the operator for review of the flight.

1.6.2        UAV shall utilize GPS to transmit information about the flight back to the operator.

1.7  Shall provide power to payload, telemetry sensors, and data- link

1.7.1        The UAV shall utilize the electrical systems on board to power the payload, telemetry, and data link sensors.

1.7.2        The UAV shall have built in redundancies in the event that a function on the UAV ceases to operate properly.

1.8  Shall provide capability to orbit (i.e., fly in circular pattern around) or hover over an object of interest.

1.8.1        The UAV shall utilize GPS to hold a specific position based on latitude/longitude coordinates.

1.8.2        The UAV shall be capable of holding any altitude up to 500 feet set by the operator.

1.8.3        The UAV shall utilize GPS to fly specific search grids that will allow the operator to search an area carefully.

1.8.4        The operator shall have the ability to choose where to have the UAV orbit based on a specific position in the air.

Support Equipment:

1.1  Design shall identify any support equipment required to support operation

1.1.1    To support the operation, SAR personnel shall require rope to attach to the UAV in the event that a person is found and in need of medicine, water, or food.

1.1.2    SAR personnel shall require a lightweight basket to carry important supplies if a person is found and ground teams cannot reach the person immediately.

1.1.3    SAR personnel shall require a thermal imaging camera for operations at night.

1.1.4    SAR personnel shall require multiple hydrogen fuel cells for the safe operation of the UAV on long flights.

Testing Requirements:

            Tests will be completed to determine if the functions described above are testable or verifiable. Commercial off the shelf (COTS) components shall be used in the development of this UAV. In order to reduce potential development costs, simulation software will be used to test the abilities of the UAV first. After simulation data indicates the UAV will operate based on the design requirements, the UAV will be tested in person. Each requirement will be rigorously tested to determine if the UAV will be able to aid search and rescue personnel during SAR operations.

1. Transportability Testing

1.1  Storage of UAV components.

1.1.1        The UAV components will be placed into the hardened case cut outs to determine if the UAV will fit snugly into the case.

1.1.2        The case will be closed to determine if the case will close properly without damaging any of the components of the UAV.

1.1.3        The ground control unit will also be placed into the hardened case to determine if spacing is an issue.

1.2   Durability of hardened case.

1.2.1        The hardened case will be dropped from heights varying from 1 foot to 5 feet.

1.2.2        Once the case has been dropped from these heights, the case will be opened to determine if the components of the UAV have not been damaged.

1.2.3        The outside of the case will be looked at carefully to determine how much damage has occurred at each height.

1.2.4        All the components of the UAV will be placed inside the case to determine if the case is less than 50 pounds.

1.2.5        Determine if the case can easily be carried based on its shape and determine if the wheels on the case roll smoothly when applicable.

Air Vehicle Element

2.1 Flight Characteristics

2.1.1    The UAV shall be flown at varying altitudes up to 500 feet to ensure the UAV is                          airworthy.

2.1.2    The UAV will be flown at the minimum and maximum operating temperatures to ensure the UAV will not fail at temperatures near these extremes.

2.1.3    The max cruising, ascent, and descent speeds will be tested in normal flight conditions. The UAV will also be tested on days that are windy. The maximum operation in wind speeds of 25 mph shall be tested.

2.1.4    The hydrogen power cell will be tested to ensure the UAV can fly for one hour loitering and up to one more hour of standard flight.

2.1.5    The UAV will be flown out to 3 miles to determine if the UAV will warn the operator of the maximum distance being achieved.

2.1.6    The communications between the UAV and the ground control unit will be tested during the long range flight.

2.1.7    Multiple tests will be ran to determine that the UAV can be deployed and in the air within 15 minutes. If the UAV cannot be assembled in less than 15 minutes, a different design based on a collapsible UAV will need to be researched.

2.1.8    The UAV operator shall test the manual operation capabilities of the UAV. The operator will also put the UAV into an autonomous flight mode to test the flight grip capabilities of the UAV. The proper pitch, roll, and yaw controls will be tested during this time.

2.1.9    Determine if the UAV can send flight data, images, and video back to the operator.

2.1.10 The UAV will be placed into an orbit around a specific point. At this time, the UAV will be tested to determine if the UAV can hold a position based on latitude and longitude. The ability of the UAV to hold altitude will be tested, and flight grid patterns will also be tested again during this time.

2.1.11 The hydrogen fuel cells will be checked carefully for proper operation.

3. Support Equipment

3.1 Required Support Equipment

3.1.1    For intended search and rescue operations, a rope shall be attached to the UAV. At this time, the payload characteristics will be determined. The UAV will be designed to carry small payloads in the event that a missing person is found but ground search and rescue personnel cannot reach the person.

3.1.2    A lightweight metal basket will be attached to the UAV. The UAV will be flown at varying speeds and altitudes to ensure the UAV can carry the required payloads.

3.1.3    Materials such as food, water, medicine, clothes, or even lifejackets will be placed inside the basket of the UAV. The UAV will be flown at various speeds and altitudes to ensure the UAV can fly with light payloads.

3.1.4    The camera on the UAV will be tested to ensure clear videos and pictures can be taken during flight and at loiter speeds.

3.1.5    The thermal imaging camera shall be tested at night to ensure proper operation.

The Development Process

            The 10-Phase Waterfall Method will be utilized as a starting point for the development of this UAV. This development process would be the most efficient process because during phases 5, 6, and 7, the testing of the UAV could be completed as these phases concern testing and development of the UAV. This would allow a smooth transition to the last phases of the waterfall method which are certification, production, and support.

            To ensure an acceptable level of safety in the operation of any airborne system, including UAV systems, the airworthiness of the system and its safe usage of the airspace     in which it operates must be addressed at an early stage in the design, and pursued in the    development and operational trial phases (Austin, 2010, pg. 223). 

By using the waterfall method, the UAV should be completed in a reasonable amount of time (1 year) and ready for use in search and rescue operations. The specimen test, prototype build and test, and the development of the UAV (modifications) will take the longest amount of time to complete as the developer wants to ensure that each function of the UAV is testable and verifiable. Phases 1-4 will be completed in 4 months, phases 5-8 will be completed in 5 months, and phases 8-10 will be completed in 3 months.

            The UAV being created for search and rescue missions has been designed to carry light payloads of water, food, clothes, or medical supplies in the event that ground SAR personnel cannot reach a person directly affected by a natural disaster. The UAV has also been designed for search and rescue missions when a person is lost or missing. The standard camera will be utilized during the day for SAR operations and the optional thermal camera can be used at night during missions. The UAV being designed must be created to carry small payloads for SAR missions. This is why basic derived requirements for support equipment must be tested. If the UAV cannot carry small payloads, SAR personnel will not get full usage out of the UAV. A hydrogen fuel cell has been selected for use instead of batteries of gas because of the flight times that are achievable. A hydrogen fuel cell may be more efficient than gas or batteries, and it could be lighter than having to carry gas. Unlike a battery that has a short flight time, the hydrogen fuel cell intended for use of this UAV should allow the UAV to remain in the air for 2 hours. This would prevent the operator from having to fly the UAV back for gas or a battery replacement. The requirements for this UAV will ensure that the UAV is more than capable for usage during search and rescue operations for missing people or for delivering small loads of supplies to a person who cannot immediately be reached by ground personnel. The GPS grid patterns will allow the operator to manually or autonomously follow sweeping patterns that will allow the operator to thoroughly search and area. The UAV will also be developed to warn the operator of altitude limitations, distance limitations, and when the hydrogen fuel cell is running low. The computer systems within the UAV should allow the UAV to return to the operator autonomously based on latitude and longitude. All the design considerations, testing, modifications, certification, and production of the UAV shall be completed in a steady manner to ensure that each step is completed correctly.

References

Austin, R. (2010). Unmanned aircraft systems: UAVS design, development, and deployment.    Chichester, U.K: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.