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
Terrain is checked for two purposes: first, to make sure that the projected flight path does not intersect terrain; and second, to make sure that the aircraft is qualified for engine out conditions over the flight path terrain. Aircraft drift down procedures and qualifications are incorporated into this check to ensure that the projected path is legal.
Because there is no AOC keeping track of crew time limits for operational legality, a crew data base is checked to ensure that the projected landing time does not extend past the crew’s legal limits. Finally, the condition of the aircraft is also checked for path legality. Factors considered here are MEL and CDL items that would restrict the projected path (including altitude and speed limits) and aircraft qualifications, such as ETOPS, restrictions to the continental US, ability to fly over water legally, and landing qualifications. If any of these checks returns a restriction, the system indicates the nature of the restriction to the crew.
The flight guidance system, for the purposes of this architecture, consists of all the sources of guidance information, including the yoke or sidestick and the throttle. This is necessary because the flown path can be determined from any of these sources depending on the modes; if the crew are flying the aircraft manually, it is still necessary to anticipate flight path restrictions. Otherwise, the crew may assume that a manually flown trajectory is free of conflicts when no restrictions are indicated, when the lack of such indications is actually due to the loss of conflict protection under manual flight control.
After the need to replan has been established and the new goals and constraints identified, the route replanning sub-function performs the calculations required to develop a new flight plan that meets all the constraints while optimizing according to specified time, fuel, or cost criteria. Again, many sources of information are required to support these functions, including airport, aircraft performance, and aircraft status databases, and winds and constraint information from ground sources. One human-centered option for the output of this function is that several routing solutions with trade-offs are graphically presented to the flight crew to support the flight crew’s collaboration with ATC to agree on final routing. In this regard, it should be noted that ATC is shown on both the left and right side of the figures; this is to depict ATC’s dual role (which applies to AOC in Figure 32 as well) as a data/information source on the one hand, and as a collaborative decision maker on the other. Another point that should be made is that it is assumed that the conflict probe and route replanning functions will be performed iteratively, as new solutions that are generated need to be re-checked to assure that they do not violate any unidentified or new constraints. There may be iteration during the collaborative decision making process between human agents as well.
The architecture for an aircraft with AOC support (Figure 32) is more complex because of the inclusion of AOC as both a data and information source and a collaborator for replanning decisions. New constraints must be considered, such as schedules, connections, fleet maintenance requirements, crew duty cycles, etc., and collaboration on replanning solutions is a three way process instead of a two-way process. Much of the flight deck replanning processes may be redundant or overlapping with AOC planning/replanning capability; this redundancy, however, may be desired in a more unstructured air traffic environment, and the airborne replanning functionality may have aircraft status and current data inputs that make it’s solution more precise.
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(51)
