Refine Your Search

Topic

Search Results

Standard

Flight Management Systems Review

1995-08-01
CURRENT
AIR4653
The information contained in this document is based on line experience with current systems. It should be used as a basis for ongoing research and development including the human factors aspects of future flight management systems and their interaction with the ATC environment.
Standard

Final Approach Spacing System (Fass)

2017-01-27
WIP
ARP5628A
This document recommends criteria and requirements for a Final Approach Spacing System (FASS) for transport aircraft. This is an Aerospace Recommended Practice to support the development of a Final Approach Spacing System (FASS) for Approach Spacing for Instrument Approaches (ASIA) operations.
Standard

Final Approach Spacing System (FASS)

2005-11-28
CURRENT
ARP5628
This document recommends criteria and requirements for a Final Approach Spacing System (FASS) for transport aircraft. This is an Aerospace Recommended Practice to support the development of a Final Approach Spacing System (FASS) for Approach Spacing for Instrument Approaches (ASIA) operations.
Standard

INTEGRATION PROCEDURES FOR THE INTRODUCTION OF NEW SYSTEMS TO THE COCKPIT

1995-03-01
CURRENT
ARP4927
This SAE Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP) provides guidance to achieve the optimum integration of new aircraft systems which have an impact on the cockpit layout or crew operating procedures. This process may also be used for modification of existing cockpits.
Standard

Mitigation for Loss-of-Control Accidents in Transport Airplanes

2010-08-12
WIP
ARP6149
Prevention of catastrophic upset mishaps cannot depend solely on recovery training. The proposed document should complement the training initiatives already in place. As a committee dealing with transport human factors and handling qualities, the output must consider both issues. At the same time, we cannot ignore initial and recurrent training issues and the widespread use of ground-based simulators. The plan would follow the approach taken in the 2003 S-7 white paper but would extend the scope to all forms of LOC, not just repeated rudder reversals. As with the white pa-per, the new document would have sections on transport handling qualities, flight control modes, aircraft displays, simulator requirements, and approval for IFR test evaluations as well as covering training issues. This new document would complement, not replace documents such as the Airplane Upset Recovery Training Aid.
Standard

Display Latency Evaluation Procedures

2012-12-03
WIP
ARP6238
This Aerospace Recommended Practice will identify the problem with latency in the pilot's instrument control of an aircraft. Recommended evaluation techniques to characterize control problems will be documented.
Standard

Takeoff Performance Monitor (TOPM) System, Airplane, Minimum Performance Standard For

2007-09-02
WIP
AS8044A
This Aerospace Standard (AS), establishes minimum performance standards for those sensors, computers, transponders, and airplane flight deck controls/displays which together comprise a Takeoff Performance Monitor (TOPM) System. This standard also defines functional capabilities, design requirements, and test procedures. A TOPM system is intended to monitor the progress of the takeoff and to provide advisory information which the crew may use in conjunction with other available cues to decide to continue or abort the takeoff. See Appendix A for supplementary information relating to NTSB, CAA, and ad hoc committee concerns and background information.
Standard

TAKEOFF PERFORMANCE MONITOR (TOPM) SYSTEM, AIRPLANE, MINIMUM PERFORMANCE STANDARD FOR

1987-08-01
CURRENT
AS8044
This Aerospace Standard (AS), establishes minimum performance standards for those sensors, computers, transponders, and airplane flight deck controls/displays which together comprise a Takeoff Performance Monitor (TOPM) System. This standard also defines functional capabilities, design requirements, and test procedures. A TOPM system is intended to monitor the progress of the takeoff and to provide advisory information which the crew may use in conjunction with other available cues to decide to continue or abort the takeoff. See Appendix A for supplementary information relating to NTSB, CAA, and ad hoc committee concerns and background information.
Standard

NOMENCLATURE AND ABBREVIATIONS FOR USE ON THE FLIGHT DECK

1985-12-15
CURRENT
AS425C
This Standard is intended to establish preferred abbreviations for use on panels, controls, instruments, displays, placards and markings. The recommendations apply to terms used in the flight deck of transport aircraft. The abbreviations, symbols and codes do not supersede those used in airworthiness regulations or aeronautical charts and documents. Where conflict is possible the operational context must be such as to resolve any ambiguity. If doubt exists, an alternative abbreviation or less truncated abbreviation should be used.
X