Numerous factors play a role in determining how unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) operators are selected. The pace of development and rapid growth of the field of unmanned aviation has resulted in varied thoughts on how unmanned aircrew is selected. The type aircraft, method of control, and payload employed for the mission are just a few of the considerations. Through operational experience and targeted research, the Department of Defense has developed sound methods and criteria for sourcing system operators. Interestingly, though, there are currently no uniform standards for UAS aircrew selection across the branches of the U.S. military (McCarley, & Wickens, n.d.). As UAS move beyond the battlefield to fill civil roles, the organizations that use them are faced with many of the same considerations the military has dealt with when addressing the question of how to select operators. As civil UAS operations expand, the lessons learned by the military that have led to successful selection of aircrew can be equally helpful for civil operators.
It is imperative to take a holistic approach to staffing unmanned aircraft operators. The logical first step in developing crew requirements is identifying the type of UAS being employed. The systems utilized for the prospective application in question are the General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc. (GA-SCI) Ikhana and the Boeing Insitu ScanEagle. Both are civil variants of proven military systems with a well-established operational history. When considering minimum requirements for a multi-platform operation, it would be prudent to assume the more complex of either the standard. The larger, more capable, and arguably more difficult to fly for numerous reasons, is the Ikhana. Basing minimum requirements on the assumption crew will potentially be utilized on both platforms ensures flexibility when needed. The Ikhana is a medium altitude, long endurance (MALE) aircraft capable of serving as a platform for instrumentation and sensors for civil research (National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 2015). With a wingspan of 66 feet and length of 36 feet, and the capability of flying at altitudes of over 40,000 feet for more than 20 hours, the aircraft is comparable in size and ability to manned platforms. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has operated an Ikhana since 2006. NASA’s pilots, all experienced test pilots, have noted the platform comparatively more challenging to fly than an F-18 (Wallace, 2009). Taking that into consideration, flight crew with substantial experience in a similar platform would be highly recommended.
The mode or method of control also aids in establishing requirements for aircrew selection. The ground control station (GCS) of the Ikhana, for example, has been characterized as problematic. The UAS seemingly did not benefit from pilot influence on the design of the operator interface (Wallace, 2009). The GCS controls offer no resistance or feedback contributing to artificial feel, and latency can be pronounced depending on which communications method is used for teleoperation (Wallace, 2009). These challenges strengthen the need for experienced flight crew with a high degree of skill.
Understanding the mission of the UAS is yet another consideration. In this case, the intended use of the system is in support of environmental studies of the ocean. The Australian Defence Science and Technology Organisation has researched the utilizing Predator UAS to support maritime patrol, a mission principally similar to oceanic research. As stated in a 2006 study, crewing requirements vary based on the specific role of the system (Defence Science and Technology Organisation, 2006). In addition to the pilot, one or more sensor operators may be required to minimize the potential for task saturation. The need for sensor operators should be established based on the type of sensors in use and the complexity of employing them.
Of course, regulatory requirements established by Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs) should be adhered to as well. In 2007, for instance, the FAA ruled a second-class flight medical certification was sufficient as a requirement for the unmanned aircraft pilot for operations in the National Airspace System (NAS) (Federal Aviation Administration, 2007).
In summary, the crew selected for maritime airborne research with UAS should be, at a minimum, commercial rated fixed-wing pilots with flight experience in aircraft with performance characteristics similar to the Ikhana and ScanEagle aircraft. In order to legally fly within the NAS, they should be able to maintain a second-class FAA flight medical. Familiarity with sensor payload operation is also recommended. The ability to safely operate the platform in integrated airspace should be the priority in these considerations.
References
Air Force Research Laboratory. (2011). Important and critical psychological attributes of USAF MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper pilots according to subject matter experts. Retrieved from https://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/2011-05-drone-pilot-study-copy.pdf
Defence Science and Technology Organisation. (2006). Unmanned aerial vehicles for maritime patrol: human factors issues. DTSO-GD-0463. Retrieved from http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a454918.pdf
Federal Aviation Administration. (2007). Unmanned aircraft pilot medical certification requirements. Retrieved from https://fas.org/irp/program/collect/ua-pilot.pdf
McCarley, J., Wickens, C. (n.d.). Human factors concerns in UAV flight. Retrieved from http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/maintenance_hf/library/documents/media/human_factors_maintenance/human_factors_concerns_in_uav_flight.doc
National Aeronautics and Space Administration. (2015, November 16). NASA Armstrong fact sheet: Ikhana Predator B unmanned science and research aircraft system. Retrieved from https://www.nasa.gov/centers/armstrong/news/FactSheets/FS-097-DFRC.html
Thompson, M. (2011, July 18). The “right stuff” for a drone pilot. Retrieved from http://nation.time.com/2011/07/18/the-right-stuff-for-a-drone-pilot/
Wallace, L. (2009, December 2). Remote control: flying a predator. Retrieved from https://www.flyingmag.com/pilot-reports/turboprops/remote-control-flying-predator
No comments:
Post a Comment