FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1995
1995 - 0075.PDF
TECHNOLOGY Today, traditional aircrew operational thinking, and the established training system, is challenged during a pilot's first conversion to a modern cockpit, particularly if the type has a digital fly-by-wire (DFBW) control system. Formerly, pilots faced no conceptual change in flying or flight-management tech nique at any stage between primary trainer and airliner cockpit. This situation changed subtly, but certainly, with the introduction of digital electronics to flight control and flight management. Independent human-factors consultant Jean- Jacques Speyer talks of the need for "cultural adaptation" to what he calls "the digital future". The Airbus A310 which entered service in 1983 was one of the first of the new-generation "glass-cockpit" airliners. The aircraft had a conventional control system (not FBW), but with the flaps, slats and spoilers electrically sig nalled. Speyer had been consulted on the A310's cockpit development. He says: "Basic human factors issues that have a direct impact on the efficiency of flightdeck operations were always kept in mind as guidelines." His aims were to minimise physical and mental workload "both routinely and in abnormal conditions" and to maximise the information-processing and deci sion-making capability of the crew. Since then, however, human-factors spe cialists have started to question whether reducing workload below a certain point is a good thing. Speyer, in a later study looking at "cognition and vigilance in highly automated aeroplanes" (Boeing 767s and Airbus A340s), Modern-cockpit history Cathode-ray-tube (CRT) flight-instrument displays and digital-technology Wight-man agement systems arrived in operational airline cockpits only in 1982. Digital fly-by- wire control arrived less than seven years ago, in 1988. Today, however, the instrument displays of the Boeing 767,757 and Airbus Industrie A310/A300-600 (the order in which the aircraft entered service) look relatively primi tive compared with cockpits in the 747-400, the McDonnell Douglas MD-11, or the fly- by-wire-controlled Airbuses starting with the A3 20 in 1988. Airbus partner companies were unique in having experience with air-transport "fly- by-wire" control technology — albeit analogue — in the Concorde. As the market new comer, Airbus was under pressure to innovate to provide its aircraft with a perceptible advantage over existing technology, because, in the late 1970s, Boeing was planning to attack the traditional-technology A300B2/B4's monopoly of the widebody-twin market with the 767. Boeing was originally going to deliver the 767 to American Airlines in 1982 with a three-man traditional cockpit — albeit reluctantly. In the event, both the 767 and 757 were delivered that year with two-man cockpits. It was not until 1986, however, when the Australian domestic airlines demanded CRT displays in their new 737-300s, that the "glass cockpit" came to the 737 series. re-assesses the criteria for automation. Among the desirable criteria he lists are: • automation of tasks for which humans are ill-suited; • enablement of easy transfer between auto matic and manual flight; • provision of easy override of any automatic navigation selection. Jean-Pierre Daniel, manager of prospective systems at Aerospatiale, the Airbus partner responsible for flightdeck engineering and assembly, says: "So far, we have [increased mode availability] because the customers have demand- Airbus cockpit/control milestones 1982 Garuda Indonesian Airlines takes delivery of its uniquely ordered A300B4-200s, the world's only two-crew conventional-cockpit widebodied type, which has a fully electro-mechanical (E-M) instrument fit but a "forward-facing crew-cockpit" (FFCC) employing the revolutionary "dark, quiet cockpit" (DQC) design philosophy. In the DQC, selector-switch lights turn off whjen a system is switched on and illuminate when the system is switched off or fails, so'inoperative/failed systems are highly visible. When there are no failures, there are no distractions. 1983 A310 enters service. It has a FFCC/DQC with four-screen electronic flight- instrument system (EFIS), consisting of a primary flight display (PFD) and navigation display (ND) for each pilot (the PFD is located above ND), but a full-size E-M airspeed indicator, altimeter, VOR/ADF and vertical-speed-indicator flank the PFD and ND in their traditional positions. A revolutionary two-screen electronic centralised aircraft monitor (ECAM) presents systems status and mode diagrammatically, according to flight phase or situation — or as selected — and presents warnings in words. Engine instruments are E-M. There is electrical signalling for control of flaps, slats and spoil- ers/lift-dumpers. The flightdeck is the same as for the A300-600, with crew type-rat ing commonality. 1988 A320 enters service. This is the world's first digital fly-by-wire (DFBW) airliner, with side-sticks instead of a control column. It has extensive automatic flight-envelope protection. Four laterally positioned, large-screen, EFIS displays, two-per-pilot with the PFD outboard of the ND, completely replace E-M flight instruments, except the standby set. Two large-screen ECAM displays are vertically mounted on the centre panel: the upper screen displays engine data and warnings, while the lower shows sys tems status. Display functions are transferable in case of screen failure. The A321 (which entered service 1994) and the A319 share cockpit layout and crew type rating. 1993 The A340 and A3 30 enter service. These are the DFBW aircraft and they have the same cockpit layout as that of the A320. ed it. Workload reduction was the motive." On the face of it, all the aims of a contempo rary cockpit designer have been achieved in the modern flightdeck. The quantity and accuracy of in-cockpit information available to pilots has increased, while airline-maintenance de partments say that the flightdeck "instru ments" — CRT displays with their integrated, multiplexed, back-up systems — are more reli able than their E-M forebears. Pilots have greater aircraft-systems monitor ing capacity, and the potential for greater situa tional awareness, using the trend and vector information on CRT primary flight displays and full-plan navigation displays. This provides the material for better decision making. According to established aircrew folklore, however, "...what's it doing now?" has become the most frequent pilot-to-pilot remark since the arrival of the so-called glass cockpit. Increased flight-mode choice from digital FMS, and the increased automation intended to reduce crew workload and to improve safe ty, have turned out to have their down-side. Airbus human-factors group manager Eddie Racca says that information being gathered sys tematically from instructors at Airbus Training indicates that "...pilots don't realise the core importance of the flight-mode annunciator". PILOTS AND AIRBUS Vereinigung Cockpit members have a particu larly wide experience of Airbus aircraft, Lufthansa having been a launch customer for the A300, A310, A320, A321 and A340. The union would like to see Airbus address several specific issues, but none of the 13 points in the pilot union's central "wish list" of operational improvements applies exclusively to Airbus air craft. Most of its recommendations apply to all types. It says, for example, that transport air craft with "glass cockpits" should be fitted with cameras to record what the CRT displays show the pilots. The union contends that the flight- FLIGHT INTERNATIONAL 11 - 17 January 1995
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
