The Evolution of Flight Data Analysis
**** Hidden Message ***** 1<BR>The Evolution of Flight Data Analysis<BR>Neil A. H. Campbell MO3806<BR>Neil graduated in 1983, with a Bachelor of Engineering degree (Electronics), from the<BR>University of Western Australia. In 1986 he joined the Bureau of Air Safety<BR>Investigation as a flight recorder specialist. Neil took a leave of absence during 1994-<BR>1995 and managed the flight data analysis program for Gulf Air in Bahrain. During<BR>1998 he was a member of the ICAO Flight Recorder Panel that developed changes to<BR>ICAO Annex 6. In February 2000, Neil joined the Corporate Safety Department of<BR>Cathay Pacific Airways Limited in Hong Kong. During 2001 and 2002 he held the<BR>position of Manager Air Safety. In December 2003 he rejoined the Australian Transport<BR>Safety Bureau as a Senior Transport Safety Investigator.<BR>CONTENTS<BR>1. Introduction<BR>2. History of flight recording<BR>3. Data collection<BR>3.1 Flight data recorders<BR>• Boeing 707<BR>• Airbus A330<BR>• Embraer 170<BR>• Airbus A380<BR>• Boeing 787<BR>3.2 Onboard avionics<BR>3.3 ATC datalink message recording<BR>3.4 ADS-B data<BR>4. Data recovery<BR>4.1 Wireless transmission of QAR data<BR>4.2 FDR data recovery<BR>4.3 FDR system documentation<BR>5. Readout equipment<BR>6. Analysis<BR>6.1 Data listings and plots<BR>6.2 Airline flight data analysis programs<BR>6.3 Animations<BR>6.4 Simulations<BR>6.5 Comparison techniques<BR>6.6 Geographical Information System (GIS) Tools<BR>7. Conclusion<BR>2<BR>1. INTRODUCTION<BR>Although the usefulness of flight data recorders (FDR’s) and cockpit voice recorders (CVR’s)<BR>for accident investigation purposes is now well accepted, this has not always been the case.<BR>Consider this report from 19621 referring to the introduction of CVR’s to the UK “…there is<BR>pretty general agreement in the UK that speech is of little, if any, real use, and furthermore that<BR>anything above 15 minutes recording is a waste. The requirement, if it comes, is expected to be<BR>5 minutes.”<BR>This paper describes the evolution of flight data analysis for commercial aircraft and considers<BR>the entire process from data collection, data recovery, readout equipment and analysis tools.<BR>2. HISTORY OF FLIGHT RECORDING<BR>“During World War II the NACA2 V-g recorder3 was introduced in transport, bomber and<BR>fighter aircraft to assess the operational loads met infrequently and structural design<BR>requirements for aircraft. This instrument records the peak accelerations and the speed at<BR>which these occur in flight. By 1950 the data from these instruments had become inadequate<BR>due to the importance of fatigue damage and the need for aircraft height to assess the structural<BR>and aerodynamic implications of gust or manoeuvre loads. Thus V-g-h continuous trace<BR>recorders in the USA and counting accelerometers in the UK were introduced in the early<BR>1950’s.4”<BR>In Australia, Dr David Warren was certain of the importance of recorded data for accident<BR>investigation purposes and he and his team at ARL5 pioneered the development of a combined<BR>voice and data recorder.6<BR>During the 1960’s, regulatory authorities around the world began to require FDR’s and CVR’s<BR>to be fitted to large commercial aircraft. Today the FDR and CVR are an accepted part of<BR>aviation with the debate now about the need for image recorders and extending recorder<BR>carriage requirements to smaller aircraft.<BR>Figure 1: Developments in solid-state FDR’s show a decrease in size and weight7<BR>1 Aircraft – Australasia’s Aviation Magazine, July 1962, page 28.<BR>2 NACA: National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics.<BR>3 V-g recorder: a non-crash protected device that recorded indicated airspeed (V) and load factor (g).<BR>4 J.R. Sturgeon (1969), Technical Prospects of the Use of Digital Flight Recorders for Operational Research and<BR>Accident Prevention, RAE Technical Report 69201.<BR>5 ARL: Aeronautical Research Laboratory.<BR>6 http://www.dsto.defence.gov.au/page/3383/<BR>7 Photograph from M. H. Thompson, A Vision of Future Crash Survivable Recording Systems, Honeywell.<BR>3<BR>3. DATA COLLECTION<BR>3.1 Flight data recorders<BR>Both crash-protected flight data recorders (FDR’s) and optional quick access recorders (QAR’s)<BR>began to be installed on commercial aircraft in the 1960’s. The evolution of these data<BR>collection devices is shown by using the following aircraft types as examples:<BR>Aircraft Type Introduced<BR>into service<BR>FDR Type Number of<BR>parameters<BR>FDR data<BR>capacity<BR>Boeing 707 1958 Analogue 5 Mechanical limit<BR>of about 10<BR>parameters<BR>Airbus 330 1993 Digital<BR>(solid-state or<BR>tape medium)<BR>280 128 wps8 (serial<BR>data input)<BR>Embraer 170 2004 Digital<BR>(solid-state)<BR>combi-recorder<BR>774 256 wps (serial<BR>data input)<BR>Airbus 380 2007 Digital<BR>(solid-state)<BR>> 1,000 1,024 wps (serial<BR>data input)<BR>Boeing 787 2009 Digital<BR>(solid-state)<BR>EAFR9<BR>> 1,000 Ethernet system<BR>8 wps: words per second. An FDR word consists of 12 bits.<BR>9 EAFR: Enhanced Airborne Flight Recorder. A combi-recorder that stores both cockpit audio and flight data. The<BR>EAFR also has the capability of storing video information.<BR>4<BR>Boeing 707<BR>The Boeing 707 (B707) was typically equipped with a five parameter10 analogue FDR. Data<BR>was recorded by engraving traces onto a metal foil. Within the recorder were pitot/static and<BR>electrical sensors separate to the aircraft sensors used by the crew. Calibration of the FDR<BR>sensors and general reliability of a mechanical recorder were problems for investigators relying<BR>on this data.<BR>Figure 2: Access to FDR via access panel in rear fuselage<BR>Figure 3: The canister in the tail containing the FDR<BR>10 Pressure altitude, indicated airspeed, magnetic heading, vertical acceleration (load factor) and microphone<BR>(radio) keying versus time.<BR>5<BR>Figure 4: The FDR inside the canister<BR>Figure 5: Lockheed Aircraft Service model<BR>LAS-109C FDR<BR>The canister improved the reliability of the FDR by protecting it from the pressure, temperature<BR>and humidity variations experienced inside the unpressurised tail of the B707. An alternative<BR>FDR for the B707 was the Lockheed Aircraft Service model LAS-109C FDR. It was a spherical<BR>analogue recorder and was coloured yellow - it weighed 15.4 kg. The pneumatic and electrical<BR>connections to the FDR are visible in Figure 5.<BR>Figure 6: Davall Wire FDR<BR>Some later model B707’s were<BR>equipped with an early type of digital<BR>FDR. This recorder was coloured<BR>flame orange and was known as a<BR>“red egg”. A digital multiplexing<BR>technique was used and the data was<BR>magnetically recorded onto a thin<BR>wire. This technique was based on<BR>the black box prototype developed<BR>by the Australian scientist Dr David<BR>Warren.<BR>6<BR>Airbus A330<BR>The A330 is equipped with a solid-state FDR and a separate solid-state CVR. The FDR<BR>receives data from an interface unit11 so the FDR system is a two-box system. Additionally<BR>some airlines choose to fit a QAR12 that receives data from the same interface unit as the FDR<BR>and records the same parameters as the FDR. Figure 713 shows a QAR and FDR connected to<BR>the same acquisition unit. This configuration requires three boxes.<BR>A QAR can also receive data from a separate Data Management Unit (DMU). When a DMU is<BR>used, Airbus label the recorder a DAR14 rather than a QAR. With a DMU, the airline can<BR>program the parameters that the DAR will record so it is more flexible than a QAR which<BR>records exactly the same parameters as the FDR. Four separate avionics boxes are required for<BR>an aircraft equipped with an FDR and a DAR.<BR>Figure 7:<BR>11 Flight Data Interface Unit (FDIU) in Airbus terminology or Flight Data Acquisition Unit (FDAU) in Boeing<BR>terminology.<BR>12 QAR: Quick Access Recorder. An optional non-crash protected recorder that airlines can install to provide<BR>access to flight data. It is more accessible and can record for a longer duration than the FDR.<BR>13 Flight Data Recording & Airplane Condition Monitoring, Boeing Airliner magazine, April-June 1992, page 4.<BR>14 DAR: Digital ACMS Recorder.<BR>7<BR>Embraer 170<BR>Embraer 170 aircraft are equipped with two digital voice data recorders (DVDR’s). A DVDR is<BR>a combi-recorder that records both cockpit audio and flight data in a single box. To improve the<BR>probability of both audio and flight data surviving an accident, one DVDR is located in the<BR>front of the aircraft and one in the rear of the aircraft as shown in Figure 8. There is an<BR>advantage to the operator in having only a single part number in their inventory and presumably<BR>some MEL relief would apply as well.<BR>Figure 8: DVDR location in the Embraer 17015<BR>Airbus A380<BR>The A380 will have a networked avionics architecture but will retain the standard configuration<BR>of a solid-state FDR and a separate solid-state CVR. Rather than a separate QAR, A380<BR>operators will be able to use the two servers that will be installed onboard running the Linux<BR>operating system. Information stored on the servers will include flight data, flight operations<BR>quality assurance data, electronic flight bag documents and other software. The two Airbus<BR>servers will receive data through a secure communications interface from the A380’s Avionics<BR>Full Duplex (AFDX) switched ethernet avionics network16.<BR>A380 operators will be able to choose to add a third server attached to the network through a<BR>secure router. The operator can then host its own applications and modify them at will as long<BR>as configuration control is maintained. Applications such as weight and balance, troubleshooting<BR>guides and wiring diagrams could be hosted.<BR>15 From the Embraer 170/175 Aircraft Maintenance Manual.<BR>16 Aviation Today, Virtual Data Acquisition, January 2004.<BR>8<BR>Boeing 787<BR>Figure 9: Boeing 787 ‘Dreamliner’<BR>The B787 will have a networked avionics<BR>architecture and will be fitted with two<BR>enhanced airborne flight recorders (EAFR’s).<BR>Each EAFR will combine the functions of a<BR>CVR and FDR giving system redundancy. A<BR>separate flight data acquisition unit (FDAU)<BR>will not be needed as a ‘virtual FDAU’ will be<BR>distributed among other software and<BR>hardware including the EAFR itself. This will<BR>reduce the total weight as a separate line<BR>replaceable unit for the FDAU will not be<BR>needed.<BR>3.2 Onboard avionics<BR>Modern commercial airliners contain many avionics systems that record data in non-volatile<BR>memory. Although not crash-protected, these sources of data can be very useful for accident or<BR>incident investigations, particularly when FDR or QAR data is not available. The EGPWS17<BR>computer is an example of a source of valuable data stored by onboard avionics equipment18.<BR>3.3 ATC datalink message recording<BR>Datalink messages such as CPDLC19 transmissions are required to be recorded. Originally the<BR>ICAO requirement was only going to require recording of messages that affected the trajectory<BR>of the aircraft but in practice it would have been difficult to separate these messages from other<BR>messages. It is simpler to record all messages, however, this is not as straightforward as it<BR>appears as enough information needs to be recorded so that investigators can know:<BR>• the contents of a received message<BR>• its priority<BR>• the number of messages in the uplink/downlink queues<BR>• the contents of a message generated by the crew<BR>• the time each downlink message was generated<BR>• the time any message was available for display to the crew<BR>• the time any message was actually displayed to the crew.<BR>While these datalink messages could be recorded on the FDR or CVR, in practice they will be<BR>recorded on the CVR and retained for the duration of the CVR (typically 2 hours).<BR>17 EGPWS: Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning System.<BR>18 Refer to this case study for more information on EGPWS data:<BR>http://www.asasi.org/papers/2005/Use%20of%20EGPWS.pdf<BR>19 CPDLC: Controller-Pilot Data Link Communications.<BR>9<BR>Figure 10: Extract from ICAO Annex 6 Figure 11: Example presentation of a datalink<BR>message on a cockpit MCDU20<BR>3.4 ADS-B data<BR>Mode S21 transponders are carried by large airliners. There are two types of Mode S –<BR>elementary surveillance and enhanced surveillance. Enhanced Mode S has a datalink capability<BR>that can be used in providing an air traffic management function. ADS-B22 is such a function<BR>and uses Mode S as the datalink technology.<BR>ADS-B data transmitted from a suitably equipped aircraft includes:<BR>• time/date stamp<BR>• flight number<BR>• Mode S ID (unique 24 bit address for a particular aircraft)<BR>• latitude and longitude<BR>• actual pressure altitude<BR>• selected altitude or flight level<BR>• groundspeed<BR>• track angle<BR>• vertical rate<BR>The update rate is approximately once per second. Mode S receivers that can decode ADS-B<BR>data are commercially available. An example is the SBS-1 base station manufactured by<BR>Kinetic Avionic Products Ltd of the UK. Figure 12 shows the receiver unit and aerial and<BR>Figure 13 shows the pseudo-radar display produced by the base station software.<BR>20 MCDU: Multi-function Control and Display Unit.<BR>21 Mode S is a secondary surveillance radar (SSR) technique that allows selective interrogation of an aircraft using its<BR>unique 24 bit address. This removes the risk of confusion due to overlapping signals.<BR>22 ADS-B: Automatic Dependent Surveillance – Broadcast.<BR>10<BR>Figure 12: SBS-1 Receiver and antenna<BR>Figure 13: Display of ADS-B tracks near Canberra<BR>4. DATA RECOVERY<BR>4.1 Wireless transmission of QAR data<BR>The recording media for QAR’s has evolved as follows:<BR>o magnetic tape cartridges<BR>o magneto-optical disks<BR>o solid-state (eg. PCMCIA23 cards or CF24 memory).<BR>Traditionally the recording cartridge/disk needed to be removed from each aircraft on a regular<BR>basis before the recording capacity was reached and data was lost. The cartridge/disk was then<BR>transferred to the readout facility (typically the flight safety department) where each<BR>cartridge/disk was individually handled and replayed. After replay, the cartridges/disks were<BR>stored for a sufficiently long period to allow for any necessary follow-up analysis, then<BR>reformatted and sent to stores for eventual return to an aircraft. There was an obvious cost in<BR>23 PCMCIA: Portable Computer Memory Card International Association.<BR>24 CF: Compact Flash.<BR>11<BR>acquiring sufficient cartridges/disks for this cycle and the manpower involved in retrieval and<BR>replay. There was also the opportunity for cartridges/disks to be lost with the loss of valuable<BR>data. The media handling statistics for one airline were:<BR>o international aircraft: 168 (15,270 legs/month)<BR>o average of 124 tapes or disks per day<BR>o domestic aircraft: 70 (11,266 legs/month)<BR>o average 43 disks per day<BR>Wireless technology is now being used to transmit QAR data without the need for manual<BR>handling. This will lower the cost of data recovery and increase the timeliness and availability<BR>of data.<BR>Figure 14: Description of Teledyne Wireless QAR25<BR>25 http://www.teledyne-controls.com/pdf/GroundLink.pdf<BR>12<BR>4.2 FDR data recovery<BR>While in-flight telemetry has been used for decades for missile launches and space travel it is<BR>unlikely to replace a fixed onboard FDR (or CVR). The reasons are:<BR>• Cost - all in-flight data transmissions have to be paid for by the operator. While it is<BR>cost-effective to transmit snapshots of important data e.g. ACARS26 it would be<BR>expensive to continuously transmit large amounts of data in-flight.<BR>• Reliability - a satellite link would be needed to transmit data during oceanic cruise.<BR>Would this be reliable if the aircraft was experiencing electrical problems or had<BR>experienced a loss of control?<BR>• Sovereignty issues - transmitted data may be held in a third state and not the state of<BR>occurrence or the state of the operator as defined in ICAO Annex 13. Would this data be<BR>under the control of the investigation team?<BR>Storing data in an onboard recorder is still the cheapest and most reliable storage technique<BR>even allowing for the occasional deep-sea underwater recovery.<BR>Data recovery, from an undamaged solid-state FDR, is performed by connecting a PC to the<BR>FDR and downloading the crash-survivable memory unit contents as shown in Figure 15.<BR>Figure 15: Downloading data from a solid-state FDR<BR>Damaged recorders require specialist recovery techniques that vary according to the FDR<BR>model and type of recording medium.<BR>26 ACARS: Aircraft Communications, Addressing and Reporting System.<BR>13<BR>4.3 FDR system documentation<BR>Figure 16 shows the data flow through an FDR system. An essential step in data recovery is the<BR>engineering unit conversion where the raw binary data is mathematically processed to obtain<BR>the relevant engineering unit eg. the raw data recorded for indicated airspeed is converted to<BR>knots. For modern airliners, recording hundreds or thousands of parameters, it is a huge task to<BR>obtain accurate system documentation, develop the parameter conversion equations and<BR>validate the results. Figure 17 shows the documentation for a Boeing 777.<BR>Figure 16: Data acquisition, recording, recovery and analysis<BR>Figure 17: Boeing B777 FDR system documentation<BR>To aid this process, a specification for Flight Recorder Electronic Documentation (FRED) is<BR>being developed with the aim of storing the documentation within the recorder memory itself.<BR>An XML format is being proposed with the documentation being able to be read by a browser.<BR>This would end the situation of investigation agencies struggling to find up-to-date system<BR>documentation in a timely way after an accident.<BR>14<BR>5. READOUT EQUIPMENT<BR>The first generation of FDR’s were analogue devices that recorded data by engraving traces on<BR>a metal foil. To readout the data, the foil was placed on a microscope table where distances<BR>could be accurately measured, correction factors applied and the parameter values derived. It<BR>was a laborious process. Figure 18 shows an example of such a microscope table.<BR>Figure 18: Early Australian readout equipment for analogue FDR’s<BR>The first generation of digital FDR’s appeared in the 1970’s and an example of a readout station<BR>is shown in Figure 19. It was capable of producing data listings and plots.<BR>Figure 19: An early UK readout station for digital FDR’s27<BR>27 W.H. Tench (1973), Read-out and analysis of Flight Data Recordings, Accidents Investigation Branch, UK.<BR>15<BR>The first flight recorder readout system for commercial aircraft in Australia was acquired in<BR>1972 by the Air Safety Investigation Branch28. It was called the FRAN (Flight Recorder<BR>ANalysis) system and consisted of a DEC PDP 11/0529 mini-computer.<BR>The FRAN system was regularly upgraded over the following decades and eventually two minicomputers<BR>were used – a PDP 11/45 and a PDP 11/73. The FRAN system was eventually<BR>phased-out in 1999.<BR>Figure 20: BASI FRAN system<BR>In 1991, a decision was made at BASI to standardise on the computer graphics system being<BR>developed at the Canadian Transport Safety Board - the Recovery, Analysis and Presentation<BR>system (RAPS). Development of a BASI in-house system ceased. To obtain the necessary<BR>performance, RAPS used Hewlett-Packard Unix workstations which were reliable but<BR>expensive.<BR>28 In 1982, the Air Safety Investigation Branch (ASIB) was re-organised to become the Bureau of Air Safety<BR>Investigation (BASI). On 1 July 1999, the multi-modal Australian Transport Safety Bureau was created by<BR>combining BASI with other agencies.<BR>29 DEC: Digital Equipment Corporation, PDP: Programmable Data Processor.<BR>16<BR>Figure 21: Unix workstation<BR>In 1992, the commercial development of RAPS was taken over by Flightscape Inc. and the<BR>software, now called ‘Insight’, was begun to be converted for use on a PC. This allowed<BR>advantage to be taken of the rapid increase in performance and low cost of PC hardware. In<BR>2005, the ATSB adopted the use of Insight and flight recorder specialists operate the complete<BR>system on their laptops, effectively giving them a portable flight recorder laboratory.<BR>Figure 22: Laptop running Insight animation<BR>17<BR>6. ANALYSIS<BR>Figure 23: Data recording, recovery and analysis<BR>6.1 Data listings and plots<BR>Data listings and plots have been used since the first generation of FDR’s was introduced. By<BR>examining the data (particularly with a plot) mutual compatibility between parameters can be<BR>checked, for example, if the value of magnetic heading increases then the roll attitude<BR>parameter should show a bank to the right.<BR>With only a small number of parameters being recorded by the first generation of FDR’s, it was<BR>necessary to derive other important parameters. For instance, rate of climb and descent could be<BR>obtained from altitude versus time, bank angle from indicated airspeed and rate of change of<BR>heading and Mach number from pressure altitude, indicated airspeed and temperature.<BR>Another technique used was the total energy graph30. By producing a graph of total energy<BR>(potential energy and kinetic energy) versus time, it was possible to estimate when changes in<BR>aircraft configuration or engine thrust occurred.<BR>Modern airliners use digital databuses to transfer data between aircraft systems. FDR’s have<BR>access to these databuses and now thousands of parameters are easily available for recording.<BR>The historical techniques of deriving parameters are now rarely required for modern airliners<BR>but still required for older FDR installations that record only basic parameters.<BR>30 R. G. Feltham (1973), Aircraft Accident Data Recording Systems, UK Department of Trade and Industry,<BR>page 62.<BR>18<BR>6.2 Airline flight data analysis programs<BR>An airline flight data analysis program (FDAP)31 involves the routine scanning of flight data<BR>(obtained from FDR’s or QAR’s) to detect flight operations events. They are typically set up<BR>with the cooperation of the relevant pilot association and are cooperative programs. Flight<BR>operations events can be chosen to coincide with the airline’s standard operating procedures.<BR>Examples of flight operations events are:<BR>• limit speeds (flap, gear, VMO, MMO)<BR>• GPWS/TCAS activations<BR>• pitch/roll limits<BR>• rushed approaches (rates of descent, late landing flaps etc).<BR>Since 1st January 2005, ICAO Annex 6 has required operators of large airliners to establish and<BR>maintain a FDAP. FDAP is a risk management process and aims to:<BR>• identify and quantify existing operational risks<BR>• identify and quantify changing operational risks<BR>• formally assess the risk to determine which are not acceptable<BR>• where risks are not acceptable, put in place remedial activity<BR>• measure the effectiveness of action and continue to monitor risks.<BR>Despite the ICAO requirement only applying from 2005, many airlines have been operating<BR>successful FDAP programs for decades, for example, British Airways pioneered a FDAP in the<BR>1960’s. The UK government also pioneered flight data analysis for civilian aircraft through its<BR>Civil Aircraft Airworthiness data Recording Program (CAADRP)32. The aims of CAADRP<BR>were to study:<BR>• the effect of environment and operational usage on the aeroplane<BR>• the way the aeroplane is operated within the bounds of its inherent capabilities<BR>• unusual occurrences caused by environment, operational usage or malfunction of some<BR>part of the aeroplane.<BR>6.3 Animations<BR>Animations are useful as they:<BR>• help to assimilate large amounts of data<BR>• place sequence of events into time perspective<BR>• link recorded data with ground features<BR>• correlate FDR data with other sources of data e.g. CVR audio, radar data or<BR>eyewitnesses<BR>• useful analysis tool for operations investigators<BR>• aids explanation of incident to lay persons<BR>• training/educational tool.<BR>Animations can show a 3-dimensional view of an aircraft from any vantage point, an aircraft<BR>flight path, cockpit instrument panels and pilot control inputs or aircraft control surfaces<BR>deflections.<BR>31 The term FOQA is also used i.e. a Flight Operations Quality Assurance program.<BR>32 E.M. Owen (1971), Civil Aircraft Airworthiness Data Recording Program – Achievements in Recording and<BR>Analysis of Civil Aircraft Operations 1962-1969, RAE Farnborough.<BR>19<BR>Examples of animations are shown in Figures 24-25:<BR>Figure 24: Animation showing a 3-d view of the aircraft and cockpit displays33<BR>Figure 25: Animation showing plan and elevation views of an instrument approach34<BR>33 The investigation report, including a download of the animation, is available at:<BR>http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2005/AAIR/aair200503722.aspx<BR>34 The investigation report, including a download of the animation, is available at:<BR>http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2005/AAIR/aair200501977.aspx<BR>20<BR>6.4 Simulations<BR>A simulation predicts how an aircraft should behave given its initial conditions, control inputs<BR>and a knowledge of the aircraft stability and control equations. The predicted behaviour can<BR>then be compared with the actual behaviour recorded by the FDR. Any differences could be due<BR>to external factors such as meteorological effects or aircraft malfunctions. In practice, only the<BR>aircraft manufacturer will have access to the mathematical models required for simulations and<BR>accident investigation authorities would work cooperatively with the manufacturer to obtain a<BR>simulation.<BR>6.5 Comparison Techniques<BR>A useful analysis technique is to compare incident data with routine data, for example, data<BR>from an incident approach to a certain runway can be compared with data from normal<BR>approaches to the same runway. In the 1970’s and 1980’s data storage was expensive35 and<BR>flight data was discarded as soon as the next recorder or tape was ready for readout. Today, data<BR>collection is relatively expensive and data storage is cheap. Some airlines now routinely archive<BR>all the flight data obtained for a FDAP so that it can be analysed again at a later date if required.<BR>An example of this technique is shown in Figure 26 where pilot pitch control inputs from 24<BR>uneventful flights are plotted with data from an incident (tail-scrape) flight shown in red.<BR>Figure 26: Comparison pitch control input (control column) data around rotation<BR>35 The PDP 11/45 minicomputer shown in Figure 20 was equipped with two 40 Mbyte disk drives. In 1977, each<BR>drive cost AUD 22,450.00<BR>21<BR>6.6 Geographical Information System (GIS) Tools<BR>The Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) was a joint project between the National<BR>Geospatial-Intelligence Agency and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The<BR>objective of this project was to produce digital terrain elevation data (DTED) for 80% of the<BR>Earth's land surface (all land areas between 60° north and 56° south latitude), with data points<BR>located every 1-arc second (approximately 30 metres) on a latitude/longitude grid. The<BR>absolute vertical accuracy of the elevation data is 16 metres (at 90% confidence).36 The mission<BR>was flown in February 2000 and the SRTM data is publicly available37. The data publicly<BR>available for Australia is 3-arc second (approximately 90 metre) resolution.<BR>Combining digital terrain elevation data with topographic maps or images from Google Earth<BR>can be highly effective when portraying aircraft tracks. Figure 27 gives an example using the<BR>versatile but low-cost OziExplorer38 application.<BR>Figure 27: An aircraft flight path obtained from ADS-B data<BR>36 Refer to http://srtm.usgs.gov/index.php<BR>37 Refer to http://edc.usgs.gov/products/elevation.html<BR>38 For more information: http://www.oziexplorer.com/<BR>22<BR>7. CONCLUSION<BR>In the 1960’s, the usefulness of flight recorders was not universally acknowledged and they<BR>were treated with scepticism in some quarters. Today they are accepted as a vital tool in the<BR>investigation of accidents and incidents. In fact, in some accidents, the recorders are the only<BR>wreckage that needs to be recovered39.<BR>The challenge for the aviation safety community is to promote the installation of suitable -<BR>lighter and less expensive - flight recorders in smaller aircraft such as the very light jets whose<BR>numbers will soon be rapidly expanding.<BR>The challenge for flight data analysts is to ensure that flight data is validated, analysed and<BR>presented objectively and accurately.<BR>___________________________________<BR>39 In 1996, a Boeing 757 crashed into the sea off the coast of the Dominican Republic, killing all 189 on board. The<BR>wreckage was at a depth of 7,200 feet that made recovery extremely expensive. The FDR recorded approximately<BR>350 parameters and together with the CVR, provided investigators with all the data they needed to precisely define<BR>the problems and to determine the crew’s actions. As a result, the only wreckage recovered was the flight<BR>recorders. 可那可能,看看! European Applicable Regulation <STRONG><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 宋体; FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; mso-ascii-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-hansi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-font-kerning: 1.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">区域导航</SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; mso-font-kerning: 1.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: 宋体; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold" lang=EN-US>(RNAV)</SPAN></STRONG>thanks
<A href="http://www.minhang.cc/thread-7257067-1-1.html"><STRONG>The Evolution of Flight Data Analysis</STRONG></A> » 发表回复谢谢
我想看看,谢谢谢谢
好东西啊!!!! 谢不错,不错。好东西啊!!!! 好 !!!!!!
页:
[1]
2