Rough Draft Peer Review

Abstract

Manned and unmanned aircraft originated around the same time period,yet manned advanced significantly in the past century. Throughout that timeframe, many lessons were learned and implemented, such as human factors via regulations and industry standards. In aviation, human factors date back to early World War II, where Paul Fitts and Air Force Captain Richard Jones investigated pilot errors involving flightdeck configurations on manned aircraft. The end goal of the Fitts and Jones investigation was to create a safer and more efficient flight deck for pilots (Human Factors FAA Safety, 2008). Currently Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) are faced with many human factor challenges. The lack of standardization in ground control stations has led to accidents and loss of UAS. Challenges on ground control stations are related to the surrounding environment, prioritization of information, legibility of fonts, and tasks taking several steps that can be done in one on manned aircraft (Landry, 2018). Conducting a study similar to the Fitts and Jones one in 1947 could bring standardization of ground control stations on Unmanned Aerial Systems one step closer. Examining accident reports and utilizing direct operator feedback on unmanned aircraft would assist in the design standardization for ground control stations, resulting in safer and more efficient operations.

Lack of Standardization in Ground Control Stations for Unmanned Aerial Systems

Human factors in aviation date back to early World War II. Paul Fitts and Air Force Captain Richard Jones were among the first to investigate different flight deck aircraft configurations with the end goal of reducing accidents (Human Factors FAA Safety, 2008). The purpose of this paper is to describe the study in detail followed by a recommendation of how this research can be applied to unmanned aircraft. Applying these findings to unmanned aircraft would pave the way for standardization of ground control stations.

On December 17th, 1903 near Kitty Hawk, North Carolina, aviation history was made. Orville and Wilbur Wright conducted the first successful manned aircraft flight. The gasoline-powered, self-propelled aircraft stayed in the air for 12 seconds and covered 120 feet. Three additional flight tests were conducted that same day. On the last one, the aircraft lasted for 59 seconds and covered 852 feet. The Wright brothers were fueled by innovation and the desire to make their vision a reality. By 1905, they had accomplished creating an aircraft capable of performing complicated maneuvers and flying for 39 minutes (First Airplane Flies, 2009). In 2017, Qatar flew from Auckland to Doha in 17 hours and 30 minutes (Longest Flights in the World, 2017). Clearly, the aviation industry has come a long way from the first 12 seconds of flight. Not only has flight duration increased, but the technology changes have been revolutionary.

The industry has entered a new era where unmanned aerial systems (UAS) have begun to enter the National Airspace System (NAS). A UAS can be utilized in many aspects, and they come in all shapes, sizes, and designs. The birth concept for an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), formerly known as remotely controlled aircraft, began with Nikola Tesla in the late 1800ss. Although manned and unmanned aircraft originated in the same era, they did not evolve in the same capacity. Manned aircraft advanced in quantity from a few to tens of thousands, while unmanned had limited production. Critical technologies such as autonomous navigation, remote control, and automatic stabilization were not ready and as a result limited the growth of unmanned aircraft (Newcome, 2004).

As technologies evolved, unmanned aircraft frequented the airspace on a more regular basis. Since the 1990s, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has allowed UAVs to be utilized for, “important public missions such as firefighting, disaster relief, search and rescue, law enforcement, border patrol, scientific research, and testing and evaluation” (Fact Sheet - UAS, 2014). Recently in 2015, the FAA and Department of Transportation proposed a set of regulations for small UAS, under 55 lbs, to enter the National Airspace (Fact Sheet, 2015). These regulations would allow for the safe everyday use of unmanned vehicles. In June of 2016, the FAA released operating requirements, known as Part 107, for non-hobbyists’ unmanned aerial systems under 55 lbs. Part 107 lists regulations for operators such as airspace limitations, visibility, and cargo. In addition for individuals to operate a UAV per Part 107, they must also obtain a remote pilot airman certification with a small UAS rating (FAA, 2016).

Unmanned systems were initially conceptualized with military applications in mind. During World War I, military leaders saw an opportunity for certain missions to minimize casualties in war if unmanned aircraft were in existence. In present day, UAVs are utilized in the military for reconnaissance due to the vast amount of information they can collect on an enemy, an actual weapon itself, or a simulated target (Palik and Nagy, 2019). Although these unmanned systems have advanced in military applications, the market for UAS has grown into the commercial industry.

In the early 2000s, commercial applications evolved for unmanned systems. The utilization of drones in photography, site surveillance and security, package delivery, and recreation took off. As a result of the rapid growth in consumer fields, UAVs have been created by many manufacturers. With many manufacturers in the booming market, these systems have been created on a shorter time frame and with many advancements. These advancements range from size and weight to capability and affordability (Giones and Brem, 2017). With the growth into commercial applications, “the global drone market is estimated to grow from $2 billion in 2016 to nearly $127 billion in 2020” (Moskwa, 2016). As technology develops, unmanned systems will continue to grow into everyday use and eventually become the norm in a vast variety of industries.

Challenges

As with any growing technology, there are a large number of challenges to overcome. These challenges range from detecting and avoiding other aircraft, to figuring out how to fully integrate UAS into the National Airspace. An ongoing challenge that dates back to early World War II is the effects of poor human factor design. Pioneers of human factors changed the way many view research and design for human-machine interaction (Marshall, Barnhart, Hottman, Shappee, and Most, 2011). Although many improvements have been made in the aviation industry with respect to human factors, there are new challenges arising with the latest technologies.

Human factors is the gathering of knowledge, skills, and abilities necessary to perform an operation in a safe, efficient, and effective manner. In order to achieve the overall goal in any given situation, the field of human factors stresses the awareness of human characteristics and limitations. Humans are very capable of responding to situations, processing information, and overall learning, but they do have limitations. These limitations can include fatigue, disorientation, and communication failures. The mission of human factors is to address these issues via training programs, awareness, and effective design. In the end, the overall mission of human factors is to not only eliminate but optimize for effectiveness and efficiency (Marshall et al, 2011).

According to Marshall et al., nearly half of UAV accidents are due to human error (2011). Human factor studies aim to eliminate errors and truly understand the operation and systems at hand. Since humans are prone to errors, McLay and Anderson state that systems must be designed and developed with these human errors in mind (2018). The study of human factors is important because it analyzes how limitations can affect human performance, recognition, and cognizance. Human factor engineers look into how individuals pay attention, allocate concentration, perceive warnings and cautions, and investigate historic human interaction with the system. An example of human factor issues resulting in negative consequences is the Avianca Flight 410. In March of 1988, an Avianca flight crashed into mountainous terrain due to “poor crew teamwork and cockpit distractions, including non-flying personnel present in the cockpit” (Salas and Maurino, 2010). As a result of this accident and subsequent studies, it was found that crew interactions were critical to the operations of an aircraft. Therefore, subpar interactions can contribute to human errors in the skies as seen in Avianca Flight 410.

Unmanned aerial systems face numerous human factor challenges. When examining the system as a whole, there are many ways safety can be compromised. Issues impacting UAS safety are a reduction in sensory data, loss of datalink, and a lack of standardization in design for the ground station control. Currently, no regulations exist for the ground control centers for unmanned aerial vehicle. Conversely, for manned aircraft, there are very strict cockpit industry standards. According to Landry, “the cockpits of conventional aircraft evolved gradually over the decades, incorporating principles learned from accidents and incidents” (2018, p. 388). There are many aspects that need to be considered when designing an efficient cockpit whether used in a manned or unmanned aircraft. According to Howe, factors that need to be taken into consideration are the familiarity of setup of the displays and controls, visual indications, cabin temperature, and emergency activation (2017). All these indications and visual displays provide the essential information for the operator to accomplish the mission safely and efficiently.

The ground control station is where the operator and potentially other personnel such as the payload operator work to accomplish the mission’s objectives. The ground control station is the equivalent of the cockpit on a manned aircraft. Although both these environments have the potential to significantly affect the operation, they have different regulations on who can be in the cockpit. In the case of manned aircraft, Sec. 121.542 states that it is a flight crew member's responsibility to not engage “in nonessential conversations within the cockpit and nonessential communications between the cabin and cockpit crews” (FAA, n.d.) among other things like eating or reading publications not related to safety. According to Landry, the ground station control environment is very different, people come and go and conversations are held on a constant basis. The silence and concentration needed to perform certain critical tasks such as takeoffs and landings are often distrubed (2017). On the other hand, applying a sterile cockpit rule may create other issues such as difficulty concentrating during low workload phases (Landry, 2017). In summary, ground control stations need a balance between minimizing distractions during critical phases of flight but being careful to not create environments that induce fatigue.

The challenges continue for unmanned vehicles in the displays of the ground control station. In many cases, operators experience confusion based on the lack of prioritization of information. For example, a warning may appear on the display, but the operator cannot identify it due to other non-crucial information being presented first. Additionally, difficult to read fonts and the lack of consistency in displays makes it difficult to adjust to the system, resulting in overload. In some cases, routine tasks that take one step on a manned aircraft end up taking several steps to accomplish the same action (Landry, 2018). These challenges make the operators job more difficult and strenuous. As a result, operators are more likely to commit errors that can result in fatalities, making unmanned aerial vehicles unreliable.

Recommendations

Manned and unmanned aircraft both originated around the same time frame. However, while manned aircraft took off, unmanned aircraft continued development in the labs. During the last century of aviation, many studies have been conducted for manned aircraft that provided valuable lessons learned. These lessons and studies can be applied in some way or another to unmanned aircraft. In 1947, psychologist Paul Fitts and Air Force Captain Richard Jones conducted a study examining the effects of different configuration of flight decks on aircraft. Their end goal was to minimize distraction and provide an efficient and user-friendly flight deck (Human Factors FAA Safety, 2008). In the following paragraphs, the study is described in detail followed by a recommendation of how this research can be applied to unmanned aircraft.

Fitts and Jones conducted analysis on pilot error with the end goal of determining the best methods to design a flight deck that would eliminate accidents due to pilot error and improve the overall efficiency. They believed that these pilot errors were a result of poor design characteristics of the flight deck.

The Fitts and Jones study examined 270 pilot errors. The accounts of the errors were collected via reports and interviews. The pilots involved in these 270 errors ranged from the Army Air Force Institute of Technology to former pilots in civilian universities. The accounts were either received from the pilot that directly committed the error or by an eyewitness. Following the review of all the errors, 50 pilots were individually interviewed and asked to describe in detail an account in which they committed an error due to misunderstanding a situation involving an instrument, signal, and/or instructions. Fitts and Jones then proceeded to have 50 other pilots interviewed in groups of five to 10 individuals. The results of the discussions were then categorized these errors into 9 categories: misinterpreting instruments that had more than one indication, reversing an instrument, signal interpretation, legibility, mistaking one instrument for another, instruments that were inoperative, scale interpretation, illusions, and forgetting to check an instrument before takeoff (Fitts and Jones, 1947).

Fitts and Jones concluded that although not all accidents can be eliminated, the amount can be decreased if instrumentation is designed with the pilot’s perception in mind. In order to accomplish this challenge, human requirements for an instrument’s display needed to be researched. Instrumentation errors affected everyone regardless of experience level. Simple fixes that were recommended that would make a difference included utilizing uniform direction-of-motion for all instruments, auditory signals for cautions/warnings, legibility of instrumentation, and consistent scale for dials throughout flight deck (Fitts and Jones, 1947). As the study made clear, instrumentation and displays posed a great challenge for manned aircraft back in the 1950s. As a result of these difficulties and their potential negative consequences, regulations were created that resulted in a standardized flight deck, checklists for critical phases of flight, and overall safer and more efficient flight for manned aircraft.

As George Santayana famously quoted, “Those who fail to study history are doomed to repeat it” (Newcome, 2004). With the lessons learned by manned aircraft in the past century, there is a huge opportunity to implement them on unmanned aerial systems and prevent past mistakes from being repeated. A study like the one previously done by Fitts and Jones focusing on unmanned aircraft would help identify issues in ground control stations. Identifying these issues would minimize errors and as a result increase reliability of unmanned aircraft. The end goal for the ground station control should be to have regulations that require standardization. With standardization, operators are more likely to accomplish missions safely and efficiently.

Conclusions

In conclusion, Fitts and Jones were among the first to investigate how the challenges of human factors can affect a pilot on a manned aircraft. Although, manned and unmanned are not the same there are many lessons that can be learned from the last century, such as Fitts and Jones study. Their study into how flight deck configurations affected pilots provided great insight into the lack of design with pilot perception in mind. A study similar to this one conducted on unmanned aircraft would help identify issues that operators are experiencing. Gathering accident reports and pilot feedback would be instrumental in designing a ground control station that operators could work safely and efficiently. These findings would pave the way for standardization of ground control stations.

References