Evaluation of Flight Simulator Pilot Cueing System Performance

The quality of the dynamic cues presented in a flight simulator can have a significant effect on pilot control behavior. High quality dynamic cueing is, therefore, considered essential to achieving the objectives of most pilot-in-the-loop simulator applications. This paper provides an overview of the concepts and issues associated with cueing quality, presents an approach for evaluating the performance of pilot cueing systems, and describes a new tool that has been developed for testing those systems. The opening section identifies four principal dynamic cues, and reviews three factors that have the greatest influence on simulator cueing quality: model fidelity, simulation design, and cueing subsystem performance. The next section describes a process for evaluating cueing system performance that measures the magnitude error and time delay present in cueing output in response to various dynamic stimulus. Cueing test development is discussed, including useful stimulus, important cueing performance criteria and different test types. The final section describes a new specialized test system developed expressly for the evaluation of cueing system performance. The highlevel objectives for the system are reviewed, along with its expected uses and key design requirements. Finally, an overview of the as-built system architecture and interface support items is presented, followed by a discussion of system validation issues. Part I – Simulator Cueing Quality The central purpose of a flight simulator is to provide an immersive environment that is sufficiently realistic to convince its occupants, at least subconsciously, that they are flying in a real aircraft. For many applications, including flight training, piloted engineering studies, and accident/incident investigations, the objective is much more specific: create a level of realism that causes a pilot’s control behavior to be the same as when flying a similar real aircraft. A number of factors contribute to the level of realism experienced in a flight simulator, including flight deck layout and lighting, and the appearance and functionality of equipment, indicators, displays and controls. The biggest factor affecting pilot control behavior, however, is the quality of the dynamic cues produced by the simulator. This correlation is due to the significant influence dynamic cueing quality can have on the perceived handling characteristics of a simulated aircraft. High quality dynamic cueing is, therefore, considered essential to achieving the objectives of most pilot-in-the-loop simulator applications. There are four dynamic cues that are particularly important to a pilot’s closed-loop flight control process: 1) the tactile response of the primary flight controllers; 2) the vestibular and haptic sensations provided by whole-body motion; 3) the content, positioning and orientation of the out-the-window visual scene; and 4) the indications provided by the primary flight instruments, especially the attitude indicator, or “artificial horizon”. Each of these four principal cues has unique characteristics, and requires specialized implementations in a simulator. An overview of the pilot cueing elements found in a typical full flight simulator which are discussed in this paper is shown in Figure 1. Audible effects, including flight deck annunciations, and airframe and engine noise, also contribute to simulator realism, and can provide important cueing information to a pilot. These aural cues are not addressed in this paper, however, because of their limited influence on the pilot’s direct control of the aircraft. Cueing Quality Assessment Cueing quality is the perceived level of realism conveyed by a cue. Assessment of such a nebulous quantity as realism, with any reasonable degree of consistency, can be a significant challenge. Nevertheless, both subjective and objective methods have been developed to assess cueing quality. AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference and Exhibit 5-8 August 2002, Monterey, California AIAA 2002-4796 Copyright © 2002 by the author(s). Published by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., with permission.