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
When developing DoD automated systems, the GUI shall be based on one commercial user interface style guide consistent with 5.6.1. Hybrid GUIs that mix user interface styles (e.g., Motif with Microsoft Windows) shall not be created. A hybrid GUI is composed of toolkit components from more than one user interface style. When selecting commercial off-the-shelf (COTS)/government off-the-shelf (GOTS) applications for integration with developed DoD automated systems, maintaining consistency in the user interface style shall be a goal. An application delivers the user interface style that matches the host platform (i.e., Motif on a UNIX platform and Windows on an NT platform). This style conforms to commercial standards, with consistency in style implementation regardless of the development environment used to render the user interface. Applications that use platform-independent languages (such as Java) deliver the same style as the native application on the host platform.
FLIGHT OPERATIONS STANDARDS
Flight operations standards are those standards required to operate the UA in the real world airspace occupied by both manned and unmanned aircraft. These include the standards for flight clearance, operations with air traffic control, aircraft certification standards, aircrew training requirements, etc. While many of these standards will parallel those used by manned aircraft, they must all be tailored to the specific environment of the unmanned platform. The details of these standards can be found in the DoD Airspace Integration Instruction, appendix F of this Roadmap.
UA OPERATIONS STANDARDS
UA Operation Standards deal with the control of UA operations, including mission planning and sensor control. This regime includes appropriate standardization efforts for mission planning and air vehicle/sensor control.
Multiple levels of interoperability are feasible among different UA systems. Improved operational flexibility can be achieved if the UA systems support appropriate levels of UA system interoperability defined in the STANAG 4586.
APPENDIX E – INTEROPERABILITY STANDARDS
Page E-14
Level 1: Indirect receipt/transmission of UA related payload data. . (provided by other standards in the NIIA - STANAG 4586 not required)
Level 2: Direct receipt of ISR/other data where “direct” covers reception of the UA payload data by the UCS when it has direct communication with the UA (provided by other standards in the NIIA - STANAG 4586 not required)
Level 3: Control and monitoring of the UA payload in addition to direct receipt of ISR/other data . (handover of sensor control as defined in STANAG 4586).
Level 4: Control and monitoring of the UA, less launch and recovery (handover of air vehicle control as defined in STANAG 4586).
Level 5: Control and monitoring of the UA (Level 4), plus launch and recovery functions
The interoperability levels defined above can be achieved through the standardization of interfaces between the UA airborne elements and the UCS, between the air vehicle elements and external C4I elements, and between the UCS and external C4I Systems. In order to achieve interoperability, the UCS Architecture and interfaces must support the appropriate communication protocols and message formats for legacy as well as new UA systems. Level 2 and above (2+) of interoperability requires the use of a ground data terminal (GDT) that is interoperable with the air data terminal (ADT), as defined in CDL/STANAG 7085 (e.g., connectivity between the GDT and ADT is prerequisite for level 2+ interoperability). At all levels, the data formats and data transfer protocols must also comply with the NIIA standards. For level 1 or level 2, the NIIA standards for data format and data transfer provide the required interface requirements. For levels 3 and above, STANAG 4586 provides the sensor and airborne platform control functionality for the higher levels.
中国航空网 www.aero.cn
航空翻译 www.aviation.cn
本文链接地址：无人机系统路线图 Unmanned Aircraft Systems Roadmap(162)
