Motion Cueing Standards for Commercial Flight Simulation Sunjoo Advani & Ruud Hosman A.M.S. Consult

Simulator design today System specified to meet FAA / JAA training regulations Motion cueing heuristically adjusted to “feel” like the aircraft System is adjusted at a phase when actually little adjustment is possible Does not account for variations in training needs

Shortcomings of current simulator specifications Acceptance pilot must acknowledge the cues as provided Trainee learns that these cues are inherent to the simulator, and may not be the same as in the aircraft Training organization must continue to provide adequate training with the device Question: Does the present approach fulfill the training needs of tomorrow?

Training definitions Training obectives Training needs Training means Required level of proficiency of successfully-trained candidate Difference between required level of profciency (training objective), and actual (current) capability The systems used for the training (from CBT to FFS)

Simulator-based pilot training Ultimate goal: Acquisition of acceptable behaviour for control, guidance and management of the flight vehicle in all flight situations. Required training is dependent on certain factors: desired capability of trained candidate (objective) current capabilities of candidate Training need = required training gradient Training needs define the training means

Approach Understand future training needs Identify Current Simulator Deficiencies Then, Actions for Future Implementation Resulting categorization of training requirements Technical consequences

Future training needs North America: Europe: Expected general shortage in near future Majors can still rely on military, regionals, etc. for pilot demand Situation more critical for regionals (replacement when pilots graduate to majors - $$) Concern: How can these voids safely be filled by training Europe: No real source of pilots for airlines, except from training academies (demographic change) Increasing environmental lobby to reduce in-flight training Leading to true ab initio Concern: How far can ab initio be applied for type rating training

Conclusions: Problem in N. America and in Europe is similar from training needs perspective Simulation-based training will play an increasing role in the training process

Future Training Needs and Stage I Stage II Training Needs of Europe and Americas are similar: Want to train for proficiency Specific training objective (e.g. pilot function and aircraft type) Stage I Training from basic flying skills to modern flight-deck environment, in a cost-effective way (incl. Type Rating) NO use of target aircraft Training ab initio pilots completely in the simulator requires some refinements and Stage II Training for Proficiency Maintenance Training for Type Conversion Possible adverse maneuver training* Training experienced pilots works well with today’s technology (except *)

Requirements for Synthetic Ab Initio Training Require acquisition of Skill, Rule & Knowledge-Based Behaviour Skill-Based Behaviour critical to basic flight control: Require an environment with little or no adaptation Perception of self-motion is critical Must deal with following issues: Motion cueing strategy Transport delays (simulator bandwidth) Ability of motion-base to generate these cues

Acquiring 3 levels of behaviour for the flying task CLASSROOM CBT PART-TASK FTD MOTION-CUEING ENVIRONMENT FULL INTEGRATION OF ALL BEHAVIOUR REQUIRED: FFS or AIRCRAFT

Current Knowledge Need to continue research into human perception and action, however we now do know that: The pilot perceives motions through both visual and vestibular information simultaneously Skill-based behaviour deals with the inner loop; Motion feedback dominates in aircraft attitude control Rule and Knowledge-based behaviour deal with the outer loops (guidance and navigation) Visual-vestibular perception supports situational awareness Time delays, even as low as 50 ms, begin to require compensatory action (adaptation to the simulator) by the pilot The only design freedom in the simulator is the motion drive algorithm and the geometry of the motion-base

Selection of the appropriate training means Proficiency requirements Type of aircraft Training objective Type of operation Training-needs driven Systematic definition of cueing environment for skill-based behaviour Integrates training experience, motion perception and motion cue generation Allows distinction between Stage I and Stage II training Proficiency of trainee Training need Aircraft dynamics Select motion-drive algorithms Aircraft motion space Select motion-base with required work space Feedback of cost-effectiveness of system choices Evaluate motion system capabilities Cost efficient? N Y Fixed configuration

Proficiency requirements Training objective Training need Optimization of motion-drive algorithms Determine required simulator motion space Design geometry of motion system Fixed design Cost efficient? Type of aircraft Proficiency of trainee Aircraft dynamics Aircraft motion space Type of operation Design has to be adjusted, simulator motion space decreased N Y Actions 1 Develop and objectively specify motion cueing criteria; recognize interaction of visual-vestibular stimulation in motion perception 2 Specify motion system envelope (and not only maximum excursions) 3 Recognize differences in motion (and other) requirements for Stage I and Stage II training

Result: Differences in fidelity levels for: Ab Initio Training - highest level, requirements dictated by skill-based Type Conversion Training - medium level Proficiency Checking - lowest level, req’ts dictated by rule and knowledge-based

Technical consequences: Equivalent time delay may vary between 50 and 120 ms, depending on training stage Differentiate motion-drive algorithm parameters (as a function of fidelity level and flight conditions) Motion system workspace based on training stage