Refine Your Search

Date

Date

Topic

Topic

Head-up displays Air data computers S-7 Flight Deck Handling Qualities Stds for Trans Aircraft

Search Results

Viewing 1 to 15 of 15
1
Sort by relevance
Standard

Flight Deck Head-Up Displays
2007-07-10
CURRENT
ARP4102/8A
This SAE Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP) recommends criteria for the design and installation of Head-Up Display (HUD) systems. The recommendations are applicable to HUD systems for transport category aircraft, which display flight information (focused at infinity) in the forward field of view. The HUD total system requirement recommendations shall primarily lead to certifiable fail-passive CAT III characteristics and performance. This document forms a part of these recommendations. This document does not address devices for peripheral vision of displays worn by the pilot, nor the presentation of Enhanced Vision System (EVS) information.
Standard

FLIGHT DECK, HEAD-UP DISPLAYS
1994-05-01
HISTORICAL
ARP4102/8
This document recommends criteria for the design and installation of Head-Up Display (HUD) systems. The recommendations are applicable to HUD systems which display flight information focused at infinity in the forward field of view. This annex does not address devices for peripheral vision or displays worn by the pilot (goggles, helmet sights).
Standard

Flight Management System (FMS)
2021-01-14
CURRENT
ARP4102/9B
This document recommends criteria and requirements for a flight management system (FMS) for transport aircraft. The FMS shall provide the functions of lateral navigation, vertical navigation, and performance management and may include time of arrival control. The FMS design shall take human factors considerations into account to produce a fault tolerant system.
Standard

Flight Management System (FMS)
2007-07-10
HISTORICAL
ARP4102/9A
This document recommends criteria and requirements for a Flight Management System (FMS) for transport aircraft. The FMS shall provide the functions of Lateral Navigation, Vertical Navigation, and Performance Management and may include Time of Arrival Control. The FMS design shall take Human Factors considerations into account to produce a fault tolerant system.
Standard

AIRBORNE WINDSHEAR SYSTEMS
1989-11-01
HISTORICAL
ARP4102/11A
This document recommends criteria for Airborne Windshear Systems, including operational objectives, characteristics, and functional requirements. The recommendations of this document apply to transport aircraft, and describe the operational objectives of windshear alerting systems, situational displays, guidance systems, and detection/avoidance systems.
Standard

AIRBORNE WINDSHEAR SYSTEMS
1988-07-01
HISTORICAL
ARP4102/11
This document recommends criteria for Airborne Windshear Systems, including operational objectives, characteristics and functional requirements. The recommendations of this document apply to transport aircraft, and describe the operational objectives of Windshear warning devices, situational displays, guidance systems and detection/avoidance systems.
Standard

Airborne Windshear Systems
2007-07-11
CURRENT
ARP4102/11C
This document recommends criteria for Airborne Windshear Systems, including operational objectives, characteristics, and functional requirements. The recommendations in this document apply to transport aircraft, and describe the operational objectives of windshear alerting systems, situational displays, guidance systems, and avoidance/ detection systems.
Standard

Airborne Windshear Systems
1993-06-29
HISTORICAL
ARP4102/11B
This document recommends criteria for Airborne Windshear Systems, including operational objectives, characteristics, and functional requirements. The recommendations of the document apply to transport aircraft, and describe the operational objectives of windshear alerting systems, situational displays, guidance systems, and avoidance/detection systems.
Standard

Takeoff Performance Monitor (TOPM) System, Airplane, Minimum Performance Standard for
2020-05-15
CURRENT
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

NOMENCLATURE AND ABBREVIATIONS FOR USE ON THE FLIGHT DECK
1994-05-01
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.
Standard

Abbreviations, Acronyms, and Terms for Use on the Flight Deck
2004-06-01
HISTORICAL
ARP4105B
This document is intended to establish preferred abbreviations and acronyms for terms used on panels, controls, displays, instruments, placards, and markings. The recommendations apply to equipment used by crew members in the flight deck of transport aircraft.
Standard

NOMENCLATURE AND ABBREVIATIONS FOR USE ON THE FLIGHT DECK
1988-07-01
HISTORICAL
ARP4105
This document 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.
1
X