as we put faster and higher toward aerospace a barrier they paid for out of a weapon becomes more specialized the air force calls for an integrated design approach to each weapon system and so many elements are specifically for one air vehicle however greater demands on the air crew call for ever closer relationship between man and machine instrument therefore i have been a major exception to the weapons system concept seldom designed specifically for anyone weapons of them perhaps the most important reason why most instruments are standard airports items is training i imagine the confusion if a pilot played the completely different panel it's time he changed aircraft imagine some bydel split second while the pilot adjusted themselves with some new reaction from an unfamiliar instrument under the airport integrated panel program pilots will find generally a new look and instrument but with a real consistency among aircraft pilots need the best balance between the specialized panel which has only one model of the aircraft and the rigidly standardized panels which spread all aircraft but don't really do the job on any of them they'll find that balance  display and control are integrated with the aircraft subsystems under the principles of the whole panel concept in the design of the panel and flight control subsystem weapon system contractors well established procedures to ensure that all aircraft subsystems are linked affectively with panel displays and control so the flight crew can carry out the assigned missions in the safest most effective manner imagine a weapons system contractor designing a panel subsystem for a completely new weapon it could be a manned orbital space bomber it could be the mobile blight control station of a missile system it happens to be a fighter bomber to examine the problem of this plane and control design of a typical weapons system will visualize a completed aircraft like that but only for purposes of discussing procedures we'll look at three major categories of average and hear from the man who had each function operational analysis must the weapon do display engineering what must the crew see and control systems integration how can each subsystem be mapped to all others the system let's begin with operational analysis on the panel and control design will be governed by the missions more so now than ever before let's hear from the contractors mr operational analysis i suppose there isn't any specific point where you can say our work in operational analysis begins in study phases we work in definitions of general missions and tactics while this fighter bomber our operations people are trying to predict the detailed operational conditions considering many factors including friendly and enemy electronic ground environment you are all familiar with mission profiles showing such factors against altitude distance re average must be closely coordinated with what we call the systems integration group which is establishing requirements for guidance and control subsystems our work in systems integration includes the assembly of information on flight control equipment to fit the requirements of the weapons system missions we have to determine the types of subsystems and from each subsystem the required function out b the selection of types of flight control equipment is an important factor in the crew functions studies based on the mission analyses in operational analysis our human factors people examine each mission profile translating it from a base of miles to a base of minutes we want to examine crew responsibilities at each minute the task analysis in some cases we will examine the nation's second by second longer analysis intervals are used on other phases where the requirements are essentially constant for longer time periods we keep alert for phases such as the attack where perhaps too many things must happen at once operational analysis uses every means possible to simulate missions and to perform tests so we can recommend which function should be automatic which function should be manual which ones at the pilot's option should have both automatic  manual control such analysis considers many features our overall consideration is that the flight crew is superior to machines to carry on operations demanding motor skills to recognize and interpret complex patterns and to maintain flexibility of decision while we work on the crew function study we supply detailed analyses of the aircraft missions including three dimensional mission models to the systems integration people by this time systems integration as a preliminary schematic drawing of the flight control system we consider the mission according to subsystem rather than flight phase this is takeoff flight phase climb flight phase followed by cruise descent for the attack penetration to the target and so on but when we consider the subsystem which is providing guidance information to displays and to the autopilot we see that attack and system governs this portion of the flight so that climb on a portion of the cruise would be an attack and mo we see that another portion of the cruise and this descent penetration are another mode in this case inertial the whole mission is analyze this way in this area data link controls the recovery and return to base my systems such as valve scan the final mission phase is approach and landing perhaps in an i l s mode so this combined with timeline operations analysis gives us a good basis for our study of what the crew must see and do this determines the signals that must be supplied to display and flight control we examine how signals can combine for adequate guidance and how the display is going to show the output of combined subsystem from this kind of study we make up a flight mode analysis chart we consider each element of this play such as mach i s safe speed g on down through out of two heading course and so forth we also examine automatic flight control system reference what is the origin of the signal that will drive each element of display and or furnish a command to the autopilot during each mission phase from such a chart we can see for example that the bank steer needle might receive inputs from the inertial system through the flight director during the penetration to target but the same display elements should also receive inputs from the terrain clearance system for part of the time the autopilot may need similar combining them signals from more than one subsystem we determine all combinations of information sources and how certain signals must be changed or combined for adequate guidance we can also see the elements of integrated display as they will be used by the aircrew when we complete this chart it becomes in effect this summary of control display need at this point we begin to work even more closely with the display engineering group in our display engineering effort we are studying the nature of the information required by the crew to carry out the specific functions of stablished in the mission analyses working with the systems integration people we study the flight mode analyses to see where existing or developmental displays may not be adequate for  in our weapons system display development is in accordance with the whole panel philosophy our guide is w a d c tech report number fifty six dash five eighty two we look for improvements consistent with the state of the our advancements we recommend new display developments only when they are clearly needed to complete the mission for example to bring clearance display is required for the low level portions of our mission perhaps those radar display becomes a part of the flight control system the pilots may place a pap on the desired flight path so the flight control system can maneuver the aircraft for the best terrain clearance flight these are things we must study when we have considered each element of display and flight control in terms of mission function requirements we prepare a detailed program for development of this play is within the time requirements of the overall weapons system development program