Search Results

The recommended design approach is described in Figure 1. The approach emphasizes the fundamental relationship between symbols, the information they encode, the context within which the symbols are displayed, and the tasks being supported. While this document is aimed at aircraft displays involving dynamic control or monitoring tasks, the methodology is applicable to a wide range of symbology development situations.

The recommended design approach is described in Figure 1. The approach emphasizes the fundamental relationship between symbols, the information they encode, the context within which the symbols are displayed, and the tasks being supported. While this document is aimed at aircraft displays involving dynamic control or monitoring tasks, the methodology is applicable to a wide range of symbology development situations.

This document sets forth design and operational recommendations concerning the human factors issues and criteria for airborne collision and avoidance systems. The visual and aural characteristics are covered for the display of traffic information as well as the escape maneuver display on conventional and electronic flight decks. System utilization philosophy and flight deck integration considerations are also presented.

This document sets forth design and operational recommendations concerning the human factors issues and criteria for airborne collision and avoidance systems. The visual and aural characteristics are covered for the display of traffic information as well as the escape maneuver display on conventional and electronic flight decks. System utilization philosophy and flight deck integration considerations are also presented.

This Glossary is designed to serve persons who need to know the accepted meanings, within specific contexts, of the terminology used in reports, articles, regulations, and other materials dealing with aviation safety -- with particular reference to terms specific to human factors in aviation safety. It is assumed that some users of the Glossary will be familiar with the nomenclature of aviation, but will need information on the language of human factors in engineering as they apply to aviation safety. Others (for example, engineers and psychologists) will have fairly extensive knowledge of the terminology of their own and related disciplines, but will need authoritative definitions of technical terms specific to aviation. Within the foregoing general framework, the following guidelines for the inclusion of terms to be defined have been observed:

A recommended pilot-system integration (i.e., crew interface and system integration) approach for concept development is described in Figure 1. The approach emphasizes the fundamental need for a top-down design methodology with particular focus on clear operational performance requirements and functional integration. While this document is primarily aimed at aircraft systems design and integration, the methodology is applicable to a wide range of design and integration situations. It is derived from well established human factors engineering design principles.

This Glossary is designed to serve persons who need to know the accepted meanings, within specific contexts, of the terminology used in reports, articles, regulations, and other materials dealing with aviation safety -- with particular reference to terms specific to human factors in aviation safety. It is assumed that some users of the Glossary will be familiar with the nomenclature of aviation, but will need information on the language of human factors in engineering as they apply to aviation safety. Others (for example, engineers and psychologists) will have fairly extensive knowledge of the terminology of their own and related disciplines, but will need authoritative definitions of technical terms specific to aviation. Within the foregoing general framework, the following guidelines for the inclusion of terms to be defined have been observed:

A recommended pilot-system integration (i.e., crew interface and system integration) approach for concept development is described in Figure 1. The approach emphasizes the fundamental need for a top-down design methodology with particular focus on clear operational performance requirements and functional integration. While this document is primarily aimed at aircraft systems design and integration, the methodology is applicable to a wide range of design and integration situations. It is derived from well established human factors engineering design principles.

Following a number of high-visibility collisions between aircraft on the airport surface, overall taxi operations have been brought under greater scrutiny. In addition, observation of taxi operations and the results of associated research programs have revealed that the efficiency of taxi operations could be significantly improved with available technologies and by applying a human centered design approach. Surface operations displays have been tested in prototype form and a number of manufacturers are moving toward product definition. This document provides guidance on the design of elements, which may be part of surface operations displays whose objectives would be to enhance safety and to improve overall efficiency of aircraft operations on the airport surface. Such efficiency increases should be realized not only in day-to-day operations, but should also be manifested in training for surface operations.

Following a number of high-visibility collisions between aircraft on the airport surface, overall taxi operations have been brought under greater scrutiny. In addition, observation of taxi operations and the results of associated research programs have revealed that the efficiency of taxi operations could be significantly improved with available technologies and by applying a human centered design approach. Surface operations displays have been tested in prototype form and a number of manufacturers are moving toward product definition. This document provides guidance on the design of elements, which may be part of surface operations displays whose objectives would be to enhance safety and to improve overall efficiency of aircraft operations on the airport surface. Such efficiency increases should be realized not only in day-to-day operations, but should also be manifested in training for surface operations.

This SAE Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP) sets forth design and operational recommendations concerning the human factors/crew interface considerations and criteria for vertical situation awareness displays. This is the first of two recommended practice documents that will address vertical situation awareness displays (VSAD). This document will focus on the performance/planning types of display (e.g., the map display) and will be limited to providing recommendations concerning human factored crew interfaces and will not address architecture issues. This document focuses on two types of VSAD displays: a coplanar implementation of a profile display (side projection) and a conventional horizontal map display; and a 3D map display (geometric projection). It is intended for head down display applications. However, other formats or presentation methods, such as HUDs, HMDs and 3D audio presentations may become more feasible in the future.

This SAE Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP) sets forth design and operational recommendations concerning the human factors/crew interface considerations and criteria for vertical situation awareness displays. This is the first of two recommended practice documents that will address vertical situation awareness displays (VSAD). This document will focus on the performance/planning types of display (e.g., the map display) and will be limited to providing recommendations concerning human factored crew interfaces and will not address architecture issues. This document focuses on two types of VSAD displays: a coplanar implementation of a profile display (side projection) and a conventional horizontal map display; and a 3D map display (geometric projection). It is intended for head down display applications. However, other formats or presentation methods, such as HUDs, HMDs and 3D audio presentations may become more feasible in the future.

The function of a multifunctional display (MFD) system is to provide the crew access to a variety of data, or combinations of data, used to fly the aircraft, to navigate, to communicate, and to manage aircraft systems. MFDs may also display primary flight information (PFI) as needed to insure continuity of operations. This document sets forth design and operational recommendations concerning the human factors considerations for MFD systems. The MFD system may contain one or more electronic display devices capable of presenting data in several possible formats. MFDs are designed to depict PFI, navigation, communication, aircraft state, aircraft system management, weather, traffic, and/or other information used by the flight crew for command and control of the aircraft. The information displayed may be combined to make an integrated display or one set of data may simply replace another.

The function of a multifunctional display (MFD) system is to provide the crew access to a variety of data, or combinations of data, used to fly the aircraft, to navigate, to communicate, and to manage aircraft systems. MFDs may also display primary flight information (PFI) as needed to insure continuity of operations. This document sets forth design and operational recommendations concerning the human factors considerations for MFD systems. The MFD system may contain one or more electronic display devices capable of presenting data in several possible formats. MFDs are designed to depict PFI, navigation, communication, aircraft state, aircraft system management, weather, traffic, and/or other information used by the flight crew for command and control of the aircraft. The information displayed may be combined to make an integrated display or one set of data may simply replace another.

This SAE Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP) sets forth design and operational recommendations concerning the human factors issues and criteria for cockpit display of traffic information systems. The visual and aural characteristics are covered for both the alerting components and traffic depiction/situation components. The display system may contain any one or a combination of these components Although the system functionality assumed for this document exemplifies fixed-wing aircraft implementation, the recommendations do not preclude other aircraft types. The recommendations contained in this document address both near and far term technology directed toward providing in flight traffic awareness, although the present version remains primarily focused on near term applications. Since this document provides recommendations, the guidance is provided in the form of “should” statements as opposed to the “shall” statements that appear in standards and requirements.

The recommendations of this document apply to such aircraft as are able to perform both normal angle and steep IMC approaches, the latter being defined as those approaches having a final approach segment angle greater than 4°. Such aircraft can include both conventional and STOL fixed-wing aircraft, commercial air transport and/or utility and normal category helicopters, compound helicopters and powered lift vehicles (tiltrotors, tiltfans, tiltwings, etc.).

This SAE Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP) sets forth design and operational recommendations concerning the human factors issues and criteria for cockpit display of traffic information systems. The visual and aural characteristics are covered for both the alerting components and traffic depiction/situation components. The display system may contain any one or a combination of these components Although the system functionality assumed for this document exemplifies fixed-wing aircraft implementation, the recommendations do not preclude other aircraft types. The recommendations contained in this document address both near and far term technology directed toward providing in flight traffic awareness, although the present version remains primarily focused on near term applications. Since this document provides recommendations, the guidance is provided in the form of “should” statements as opposed to the “shall” statements that appear in standards and requirements.

The recommendations of this document apply to such aircraft as are able to perform both normal angle and steep IMC approaches, the latter being defined as those approaches having a final approach segment angle greater than 4°. Such aircraft can include both conventional and STOL fixed-wing aircraft, commercial air transport and/or utility and normal category helicopters, compound helicopters and powered lift vehicles (tiltrotors, tiltfans, tiltwings, etc.).

This ARP defines recommended flight crew interface design processes and methods for new flight deck designs as well as modifications to the flight crew interface of existing flight decks of transport category aircraft (Part 25), which includes commercial transport aircraft, regional and business aircraft. These processes and methods are intended to be utilized by the design engineers of manufacturers of transport category aircraft or any modifiers to the flight deck system. Modifiers include equipment suppliers, avionics manufacturers, aircraft operators, original equipment manufacturers (OEM), regulatory authorities, or anyone seeking a supplemental type certificate (STC), type certificate (TC), amended TC, field approval, or equivalent approval. The processes and methods described in this ARP address the integration of human factors/ergonomics, engineering, and flight operations in the design and/or modification of flight crew interfaces.

This ARP defines recommended flight crew interface design processes and methods for new flight deck designs as well as modifications to the flight crew interface of existing flight decks of transport category aircraft (Part 25), which includes commercial transport aircraft, regional and business aircraft. These processes and methods are intended to be utilized by the design engineers of manufacturers of transport category aircraft or any modifiers to the flight deck system. Modifiers include equipment suppliers, avionics manufacturers, aircraft operators, original equipment manufacturers (OEM), regulatory authorities, or anyone seeking a supplemental type certificate (STC), type certificate (TC), amended TC, field approval, or equivalent approval. The processes and methods described in this ARP address the integration of human factors/ergonomics, engineering, and flight operations in the design and/or modification of flight crew interfaces.