5.4 Flight Crew Interfaces
The analysis also does not address the issue of flight deck interfaces. But we can speculate on some central issues that will arise as this work progresses. First and foremost, we are advocating the presentation of considerably more information on the flight deck to support a large flight crew role in flight replanning and flight crew situation awareness and anticipation/prediction. Current flight planning information is distributed on a variety of displays, including the Navigation Display, various Flight Management System (FMS) Control Display Unit (CDU) pages, communication displays (e.g.., ACARS) and paper materials (manuals, charts, flight plans, etc.). By introducing more information and adding the requirement of (1) common formats to build shared mental models, (2) graphic tools to allow reference to common information by distributed stakeholders, (3) more frequent updates and redundancy of information to improve its reliability and accuracy, (4) flexible, intuitive methods of manipulating views, formats, and adding/subtracting information, and (5) graphical information integration to allow a “big picture” view, an enormous display/control burden is added to an already informationally-inundated flight deck. This creates a tremendous challenge.
Developing an integrated replanning “constraint” display alone is a Herculean task. Imagine trying to convey all the “spatial” constraints on flight replanning on one integrated 8” x 8” display; convective weather, turbulence, congested airspace, traffic flow constraints, special use airspace, individual traffic, winds, terrain, etc., all displayed in a meaningful way without clutter or occlusion. Further, depicting all this three-dimensional information in a way that supports the need for lateral and vertical planning and awareness with different range and resolution requirements is a significant issue. The communication links to support real-time collaborative decision making are not trivial either, both in terms of the communication media and pilot interfaces. Again, the interface issues related to the solutions proposed here are daunting, and will require innovative, possibly paradigm-shifting solutions, possibly requiring a hierarchy of information elements based on the analysis conducted as part of the present program.
5.5 Flight Deck Integration
Flight Deck integration must be addressed at architectural, functional, configuration, and pilot interface levels. A new flight replanning concept, especially one which includes assumptions about access of sensed, stored, and datalinked information by new processing modules, must assure that those information links can be supported by the system architecture. The new functionality must “play” with existing functionality, that is, if some sub-functions are already supported in existing boxes, then the new, more comprehensive functionality must interface to those functions and resolve any incompatibilities. The configuration and interfaces must take into account existing constraints (e.g., number and size of displays) and existing, competing requirements for supporting hardware and conduits (e.g., datalink, voice channels, processing boxes), and either propose a “clean slate” solution or a solution which adds devices, boxes, displays, etc., to support new functionality on a flight deck that may be very limited in the ability of existing resources (automation, interfaces, and humans) to accommodate new functions.
中国航空网 www.aero.cn
航空翻译 www.aviation.cn
本文链接地址：Airborne-Based Conflict Probe(49)
