Flight Segment Identification as a Basis for Pilot Advisory(11)

曝光台 注意防骗 网曝天猫店富美金盛家居专营店坑蒙拐骗欺诈消费者

There are several areas that deserve additional research and development. The “automated path guidance” feature, in which the P-FSI result commands the HITS deserves more attention. Our subjective observation is that this feature will become a “must-have” for synthetic vision highways. The “procedure guidance” display should also be studied some more. Does such a display improve a pilot’s execution of new procedures? Finally, there is the need to automate the design of FSI models for specific aircraft and procedures. Currently, building the models is a time-consuming, trial-and-error process. Commercialization will require a training algorithm that adapts the basic models to specific aircraft models and new procedures. 

Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the NASA SATS project leadership (Sally Johnson, Sally Viken, and Brian Baxley) for the opportunity to apply flight segment identification technology to the High Volume Operations concept. We are also grateful to Dr. John Valasek and Jie Rong of Texas A&M University for their fantastic support in transitioning ASTRA to the HVO application. The NC&UGP SATSLab leadership at RTI International (Lou Williams, Michael Heck, Dennis Wilt, Jim Henion, and Randall Davis) deserve special recognition for managing the diverse team and making the flight tests such a success. Keith Alter and Andrew Barrows of Nav3D Corporation went “beyond the call of duty” in helping us integrate the FSI with their synthetic vision libraries. Finally, it is hard to imagine how everything would have fallen together without the engineering excellence of Paul Snow. Thank you to all.

References
1 Anonymous, “Personal Air Transportation Technologies for Flight Demonstration”, Small Business Innovation Research &
Small Business Technology Transfer Program Solicitation, 2005.
2 V. A. Carre.o, Concept for Multiple Operations at Non-Tower Non-Radar Airports During Instrument Meteorological
Conditions, Proceedings of the 22nd Digital Aviation Systems Conference, DASC 2003, Indianapolis, Indiana, 12-16 October
2003.
3 J. H. Painter, “Knowledge-based control,” in Proceedings of the 1992 IEEE Symposium on Computer Aided Control System
Design, Napa, CA, March 1992, pp. 138-147.
4 T. H. Nguyen and D. T. Ward, “A neural-network based inference engine for a general aviation pilot advisor,” Paper #97-0221 of the AIAA 35th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, January 1997.
5 J. Painter, W. Kelly, J. Trang, K. Lee, P. Branham, J. Crump, D. Ward, K. Krishnamurthy, D. Woo, W. Alcorn, and R. Yu,
“Decision Support for the General Aviation Pilot”, Proceedings of the 1997 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and
Cybernetics, Orlando, FL, October 12-15, 1997, pp. 88-93.
6 J. Rong and J. Valasek, “Onboard Pilot Decision Aid For High Volume Operations In Self-Controlled Airspace”, Proceeding
of the 23rd International Digital Avionics Systems Conference, 2004.
7 C. Adams, M. Consiglio, K. Jones, D. Williams, T. Abbott, “Development of the SATS HVO Operational Concept: Nominal
Operations,” NASA Langley Research Center, June 29, 2003.
8 G. Dowek, C. A. Mu.oz, and V. A. Carre.o, “Abstract Model of the SATS Concept of Operations: Initial Results and
Recommendations,” NASA/TM-2004-213006, March 2004.
9 C. Adams, V. Carreno, M. Consiglio, C. Munoz, D. Williams, “SATS HVO Conflict Detection and Alerting Functional
Requirements,” NASA Langley Reseach Center, December 4, 2003.
10 L. A. Zadeh, “Fuzzy sets,” Information and Control, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 338 -353, June 1965.
11 V. Q. Harral, “Genetic algorithms for tuning fuzzy membership functions in flight control software,” M.S. Thesis,
Department of Electrical Engineering, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, December 1995.
　
中国航空网 www.aero.cn
航空翻译 www.aviation.cn
本文链接地址：Flight Segment Identification as a Basis for Pilot Advisory(11)