Flight Simulation

Year in Review

FY 02
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
FOREWORD

Aviation Systems Division

NASA Ames Research Center

Moffett Field, California 94035

25 September 2002

This is the Fiscal Year 2002 

Annual Report for NASA Ames 

FutureFlight Central (FFC), the 

Crew Vehicle Systems Research 

Facility (CVSRF), and the 

Vertical Motion Simulation (VMS) 

Complex. It is intended to report 

the more significant events of 

FY 02 and includes an Executive 

Summary with comments on 

future plans, the FY 02 Simulation 

Schedule, performance summaries 

of investigations conducted 

during the year, and a summary 

of Research and Technology 

Upgrade Projects.
4 Aviation Systems Division

Acknowledgments

About the Cover

Front cover: Simulations from each of the three SimLabs facilities are depicted on this year’s cover. 

l FutureFlight Central’s Surface Management System (SMS) study is shown at the far left. This was the

 second SMS simulation, and it further evaluated the SMS concept; it also tested the combined functionality

 of SMS with the Traffic Management Advisor (TMA). Details can be found on p. 30. 

l The center image was created by Ken Lindsay (NASA NeuroEngineering Lab) and is from the Crew

 Vehicle Systems Research Facility’s (CVSRF) second study of the Integrated Vehicle Modeling

 Environment (IVME). IVME provides a flexible simulation architecture that allows CVSRF to conduct

 simulations with a variety of aircraft models on one simulator, the Advanced Concepts Flight Simulator.

 More information about this project can be found on p. 27. 

l The picture on the far right shows test pilot Ron Gerdes (Northrop Grumman Information Technology)

 during the Polhemus Head Tracker Project, conducted at the Vertical Motion Simulator (VMS). This 

 project successfully determined the viability of using a magnetic head tracking system in an

 interchangeable cab operating in the electromechanical environment of the VMS. Details about this study

 may be found on p. 37.

Back cover: The three facilities that constitute SimLabs are capable of fully integrated simulations for a 

broad spectrum of aerospace research. All three labs have conducted studies relating to different aspects of 

commercial transport vehicles, similar to the G-2 aircraft (Dave Carothers, Northrop Grumman Information 

Technology) depicted here.

Special thanks to Tom Alderete, Dave Astill, Deborah Ballinger, Jim Blount, Dave Carothers, Girish Chachad, 

Paul Chaplin, William Chung, Bill Cleveland, Steve Cowart, Nancy Dorighi, Dean Giovannetti, Scott Malsom, 

Joanna Martin, Joe Mastroieni, Julie Mikula, Terry Rager, Kathleen Starmer, Barry Sullivan, and Nancy Tucker 

for contributions made to the production of this report.
Table of Contents

Foreword ............................................................................................................................... 3

Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. 7

FY 02 Simulation Schedule ................................................................................................... 9

FY 02 Project Summaries.................................................................................................... 10

FFC Project Summaries ...................................................................................................... 13

Surface Management System: Second Simulation........................................................ 14

Kennedy Space Center Tower and Console .................................................................. 15

Human-Operated Robotic Science Evaluation .............................................................. 16

CVSRF Project Summaries................................................................................................. 17

Generalized Predictive Control for Reconfigurable Flight Control ................................. 18

Aircraft Hazard Table Development for Turbulence Prediction and Warning Systems .. 19

Distributed Air-Ground Demonstration 2002 .................................................................. 20

C-17 Neural Flight Control System ................................................................................ 21

FAA Motion..................................................................................................................... 22

Integrated Vehicle Modeling Environment Development II ............................................ 23

VMS Project Summaries ..................................................................................................... 25

Comanche Helmet-Mounted Display (HMD) Simulation................................................ 26

Boeing Advanced Theater Transport (ATT).................................................................... 27

Space Shuttle Vehicle 2002-1........................................................................................ 28

Modern Turbulence ........................................................................................................ 29

National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)............................................................... 30

Virtual Flight Rapid Integration Test Environment IV...................................................... 31

Research & Technology Projects......................................................................................... 33

Virtual Airspace Simulation Technology (VAST)............................................................. 34

Virtual Laboratory (VLAB) .............................................................................................. 35

VMS Digital Motion Control Unit .................................................................................... 36

Polhemus Head Tracking System (PHTS) Motion Study............................................... 37

CVSRF Air Traffic Control Laboratory Upgrade ............................................................. 38

Acronyms............................................................................................................................. 39

Appendix: Description of Simulation Facilities..................................................................... 42
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Aviation Systems Division 7

Executive Summary

Introduction

The staff of the NASA Ames Simulation Laboratories is proud to present the Annual 

Report for Fiscal Year 2002. This report documents the Simulation Experiments and 

Research and Technology Projects accomplished in three major research and test facilities located at the NASA Ames Research Center: FutureFlight Central (FFC), the Crew 

Vehicle Systems Research Facility (CVSRF), and the Vertical Motion Simulator (VMS). 

The year was highly productive, and the staff--teamed with researchers from around 

the world--successfully accomplished a broad range of aerospace technology research 

experiments. The scope of research was focused on crucial topics of importance, such as 

aerospace transportation safety, air transportation system capacity, innovative information 

technology applications, and the development of advanced aerospace vehicle concepts.

 The Aviation Systems Division is responsible for the suite of Simulation Laboratories 

(SimLabs) at NASA’s Ames Research Center. Within the Division, the Aerospace Simulation Operations Branch manages and operates the facilities, the Simulation Planning 

Office performs the business development functions, and Northrop Grumman Information 

Technology (IT) performs support tasks as a NASA contractor. With this premier suite of 

facilities and expert staff, Ames has the capability for high fidelity simulation of all elements of aerospace vehicle and transportation systems, including airport ground operations, air traffic management, crew station issues, crew/vehicle interfaces, vehicle design, 

dynamics, and handling qualities. Throughout the year, the SimLabs staff has operated all 

of the facilities with the highest level of safety, consistently excellent quality, and dedication to customer satisfaction. We continue to work with our customers and research partners from government, industry, and academia, to find ways to improve SimLabs’ operation and efficiency and to meet the challenges of future research and economic trends.

Key Activities in Fiscal Year 2002

l FutureFlight Central is an air traffic control/air traffic management test facility 

featuring a 360-degree, full-scale visual simulation of an airport environment as 

viewed from within the control tower. The control tower interior space accommodates 

a full compliment of air traffic controllers and airport operations personnel. This facility 

serves as an excellent tool to solve current operational issues at airports, as well as 

to explore new and exciting concepts for the future. With the Surface Management 

System (SMS) Project, FFC played a key role, providing the research team with a 

realistic working environment, essential to designing and integrating a useful decision 

support tool for managing airport traffic. After six days of testing in FutureFlight 

Central, preliminary results indicated the SMS has the potential to be an effective tool.

l The Crew Vehicle Systems Research Facility features very high fidelity, full 

mission, motion-based flight simulation capabilities. There are two hexapod motion 

base simulator cockpit systems in the CVSRF: a B747-400, FAA Level D certified 

simulator, and the Advanced Concepts Flight Simulator. Additionally, a full-featured 

air traffic control (ATC) simulation facility is integrated with each of these simulators. 

A significant simulation in FY 02 was in support of research that integrated the Neural 

Flight Control System (NFCS) with the Integrated Vehicle Modeling Environment/C17 aircraft model. Simulated flight tests were conducted to document the airplane’s 

characteristics and evaluate its handling qualities in normal and failure modes. The 

NFCS noticeably improved the flight of the aircraft when impaired by failed control 

surfaces.
8 Aviation Systems Division 

l The Vertical Motion Simulator is a complex of simulation capabilities which includes 

five interchangeable, reconfigurable cockpits, three large multi-channel visual 

systems, and the world’s largest amplitude motion cueing system. An Air Force/Boeing 

Team utilized the unique capabilities of the VMS to develop flight control system 

configurations and landing requirements for the Advanced Theater Transport (ATT) 

project. ATT is an aircraft concept designed for Super-Short Take Off and Landing 

(SSTOL) operation. This advanced vehicle concept features tilting wings and no 

tail surfaces. The simulation met all the research objectives and also generated 

considerable information for design analysis and evaluation. Test pilots and engineers 

were favorably impressed with the important role that large motion cueing played in 

evaluating the SSTOL class of aircraft.

l The SimLabs staff made significant progress in the initial stages of the Virtual 

Airspace Simulation Technology Real-Time (VAST-RT) Project, which will interconnect 

simulation facilities anywhere in an open architecture and is being demonstrated with 

the simulators in the Aviation Systems Division. Specifically, the purpose of VASTRT is to develop real-time simulation tools for exploring new air traffic management 

technologies that will facilitate an increase in air traffic and ground capacity while 

simultaneously improving safety and efficiency. The team utilized FY 02 to ascertain 

and formulate the preliminary Project requirements. This culminated in a successful 

Preliminary Design Review and delivery of a Preliminary System Design Document.

Looking Ahead to Fiscal Year 2003

SimLabs will begin what is expected to be a long and exciting partnership with the 

Lockheed Martin Company to develop and conduct Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) simulations. 

Over the last few years, SimLabs worked with both Lockheed Martin and Boeing during 

the JSF Concept Demonstrator Aircraft phase. We will now work with Lockheed Martin on 

the Engineering , Manufacturing, and Development phases, assisting in their study of the 

aircraft’s Short Take Off/Vertical Landing (STOVL) characteristics.

SimLabs is reinvigorating a fruitful partnership with the National Transportation Safety 

Board (NTSB), assisting the NTSB in accident investigation work. As the understanding 

of accident causes and causal factors improves, the emphasis in investigations is shifting from final-factor analysis to a forensic approach, which holds promise to yield greater 

benefits to the safety of the aviation system.

Another long-term effort that has been gaining momentum is the VAST-RT activity, an 

element of the Virtual Airspace Modeling and Simulation (VAMS) Project. The planning 

and design effort mentioned above will continue into FY 03, and the work of implementing the various designs and plans will also get underway. The emphasis will shift from 

requirements definition and preliminary design to building a series of simulations. The 

VAST design, integrated with existing facilities, will demonstrate the project’s capabilities 

in a series of simulations scheduled in FY 03-04.

What Can Be Found in This Annual Report

The first section contains the FY 02 Simulation Schedule and Project Summaries. 

The following sections provide information about the simulation Projects completed in 

FFC, CVSRF, and the VMS, as well as the Research and Technology Upgrade Projects. 

Finally, the reader will find a list of acronyms used throughout the report and an appendix 

containing facility descriptions.

Tom Alderete

Chief, Simulation Planning Office

Aviation Systems Division

Barry Sullivan

Chief, Aerospace Simulation 

Operations Branch

Aviation Systems Division
Aviation Systems Division 9 Aerospace Simulation Operations Branch Aviation Systems Division Ames Research Center FY 02 Simulation Schedule VMS LEGEND: Comanche HMD=Comanche Helmet-Mounted Display ATT=Advanced Theater Transport SSV=Space Shuttle Vehicle Modern Turb=Modern Turbulence NTSB=National Transportation Safety Board VF-RITE=Virtual Flight Rapid Integration Test Environment CVSRF LEGEND: GPC=Generalized Predictive Control Hazard Table= Aircraft Hazard Table Development DAG=Distributed Air-Ground Demonstration NFCS/C-17=C-17 Neural Flight Control System IVME2=Integrated Vehicle Modeling Environment FFC LEGEND: SMS=Surface Management System KSC=Kennedy Space Center Robotic Science=Human-Operated Robotic Science 
10 Aviation Systems Division 

FY 02 Project Summaries

Continued next page...

FFC Simulation Projects

1. Surface Management System: Second 

Simulation

Date: Jan 10 - Jan 17, 2002

Purpose: To further evaluate the effectiveness 

of a decision-support tool which will aid in 

management of airport surface traffic and to 

investigate its combined functionality with the 

Traffic Management Advisor tool.

2. Kennedy Space Center Tower and Console

Date: Jun 18 - Jun 20, 2002

Purpose: To validate optimum tower location, 

height, and interior layout for the new control 

tower planned for Kennedy Space Center.

3. Human-Operated Robotic Science Evaluation

Date: Jul 22 - Jul 26, 2002

Purpose: To help develop methods for remote 

exploration of distant locations.

CVSRF Simulation Projects

1. Generalized Predictive Control for 

Reconfigurable Flight Control

Date: Nov 05 - Nov 25, 2001 (ACFS)

Purpose: To compare the Generalized Predictive 

Control System with the Neural Flight Control 

System for reconfigurable control of a damaged 

aircraft.

2. Aircraft Hazard Table Development for 

Turbulence Prediction and Warning Systems

Date: Dec 03 - Dec 17, 2001 (B747)

Purpose: To generate data to aid in the 

development of a hazard table for four-engine, 

heavy transport aircraft.

3. Distributed Air-Ground Demonstration 2002

Dates: Jan 14 - Jan 19, 2002; Jun 24 - Jun 28, 

2002; 

Sep 09 - Oct 04, 2002 (ACFS)

Purpose: To examine interactions between 

airborne flight crew and ground-based air traffic 

controllers, with specific emphasis on human 

factors. 

4. C-17 Neural Flight Control System

Date: Apr 08 - Apr 26, 2002 (ACFS)

Purpose: To integrate the Neural Flight Control 

System of the ACFS with the Integrated Vehicle 

Modeling Environment of the C-17 model and 

document handling characteristics under normal 

and failure conditions.

5. FAA Motion

Date: Apr 08 - Jun 01, 2002 (B747)

Purpose: To investigate the effects of simulator 

motion cueing in airline pilot transfer of training.

6. Integrated Vehicle Modeling Environment 

Development II 

Date: Aug 05 - Aug 23, 2002 (ACFS)

Purpose: To provide a flexible architecture in the 

ACFS to simulate various aircraft models, with 

specific focus on the Boeing C-17 model.

FB—Fixed-Base Simulators

VMS—Vertical Motion Simulator 

ACFS—Advanced Concepts Flight Simulator 

B747—Boeing 747 Simulator 
Aviation Systems Division 11

VMS Simulation Projects

1. Comanche Helmet-Mounted Display (HMD) 

Simulation

Date: Jan 14 - Feb 22, 2002 (FB)

Aircraft type: RAH-66 Comanche helicopter

Purpose: To compare pilot performance using 

both new contact analog symbology and 

standard compressed symbology under identical 

flight scenarios.

2. Boeing Advanced Theater Transport (ATT)

Date: Feb 11 - Mar 15, 2002 (VMS)

Aircraft type: ATT 187-202 transport

Purpose: To examine control system guidelines 

and landing requirements for the ATT aircraft.

3. Space Shuttle Vehicle 2002-1

Date: Mar 25 - Apr 19, 2002 (VMS)

Aircraft type: Space Shuttle Orbiter

Purpose: To maintain concurrence with 

upgraded Orbiter software and provide the pilot 

astronaut corps with training in Orbiter landing 

and rollout.

4. Modern Turbulence

Date: Jul 08 - Aug 08, 2002 (VMS)

Aircraft type: UH-60A Black Hawk helicopter

Purpose: To evaluate a new rotorcraft turbulence 

model and examine new control laws which 

could assist pilots when flying in tight quarters 

and under degraded visual conditions.

5. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)

Date: Aug 12 - Aug 23, 2002 (VMS)

Aircraft type: Commercial transport

Purpose: To assist the NTSB with future 

transport accident investigations. 

6. Virtual Flight Rapid Integration Test 

Environment IV

Date: Sep 03 - Sep 27, 2002 (VMS)

Aircraft type: CTV8

Purpose: To merge advanced Information 

Technologies to facilitate flight simulation as an 

integral part of the vehicle design process.

FY 02 Project Summaries

Research & Technology Projects

1. Virtual Airspace Simulation Technology RealTime (VAST-RT)

Purpose: To develop real-time simulation 

tools for exploring new air traffic management 

technologies that will facilitate an increase in air 

traffic and ground capacity while simultaneously 

improving safety and efficiency. 

2. Virtual Laboratory (VLAB)

Purpose: To enhance and deploy a collaborative 

engineering tool for researchers to interact in 

real-time with VMS experiments from various 

remote locations.

3. VMS Digital Motion Control Unit 

Purpose: To replace the VMS’s analog-based 

Motion Control Unit (MCU) with a modern 

programmable digital MCU.

4. Polhemus Head Tracking System (PHTS) 

Motion Study

Purpose: To determine the viability of 

using a magnetic head tracking system in 

an Interchangeable CAB operating in the 

electromechanical environment of the VMS. 

5. Air Traffic Control Lab Upgrade

Purpose: To integrate PC-based systems in the 

CVSRF while increasing simulation capabilities 

and reducing maintenance costs.
12 Aviation Systems Division 
Aviation Systems Division 13

FutureFlight Central provides capabilities for 

research in Air Traffic Control and human factors via large-scale simulations. The two-story 

facility offers a 360-degree, full-scale, real-time 

simulation of an airport, where controllers, pilots, 

and airport personnel can interact to optimize 

operating procedures and test new technologies.

FutureFlight Central

Research Facility

NASA FutureFlight Central is a national Air Traffic 

Control/Air Traffic Management test facility dedicated 

to solving the present and emerging capacity problems 

of the nation’s airports. The facility was designed in collaboration with the Air Transportation Association, the 

Federal Aviation Administration, the National Air Traffic 

Controllers Association, and the Supervisors' Committee.

FFC

 PROJECT

 SUMMARIES
14 Aviation Systems Division 

Surface Management System: Second Simulation

Deborah Walton, Mike Madson, Marlene Hooten, Boris Rabin, Ken Christensen, Betty Silva, 

Stephen Atkins, NASA ARC; Chris Brinton, Metron; Susan Lockwood, Seagull Technologies; 

Jim Hitt, Booz-Allen Hamilton; Farid Haddad, Jim McClenahen, Raytheon; 

Chris Murphy, Claudine Herbelin, Northrop Grumman Information Technology (IT) 

varying conditions and to evaluate their perception of 

SMS’s performance. During the other three experimental days, three conditions were tested: baseline, 

SMS alone, and SMS with TMA. Each hour-long 

scenario was based on actual traffic observed at 

DFW. The SMS display format was the same for all 

controller positions.

FutureFlight Central’s simulation software delivered real-time aircraft updates (including aircraft ID, 

aircraft type, latitude, longitude, altitude, climb rate, 

on-ground/airborne status, heading, ground speed, 

and simulation time) to the SMS. A High Level Architecture (HLA) interface transferred the necessary 

information to the SMS software. 

Results

Interoperability between SMS and TMA was successfully demonstrated. Specifically, cooperative 

management of arrivals and departures, by using 

TMA and SMS information together, maximized the 

use of runways, taxiways, and gates, and thus minimized delays. Additionally, several key observations 

were made regarding procedures and preferences of 

local and ground controllers and TMCs.

Stephen Atkins, NASA’s Project Lead for SMS, 

noted, “We learned a tremendous amount...about 

how controllers assign departures to runways, 

sequence departures, and select taxi routes, and 

how SMS can better help tower controllers perform 

these tasks.”

Investigative Team

NASA Ames Research Center (ARC)

Metron

Seagull Technologies

Booz-Allen Hamilton

Northrop Grumman IT 

Raytheon

Summary

The Surface Management System (SMS) is a 

decision-support tool that will help controllers and 

air carriers manage airport surface traffic. The goal 

of this second simulation was to further evaluate 

the SMS concept and performance, and to test the 

combined functionality of SMS with another tool, the 

Traffic Management Advisor (TMA).

Introduction

NASA Ames Research Center’s Advanced Air 

Transportation Technologies (AATT) Project, in 

cooperation with the FAA, is studying automation for 

aiding surface traffic management at major airport 

facilities. The SMS is an enhanced decision-support 

tool that will help controllers and airlines manage 

aircraft surface traffic at busy airports, thus improving 

safety, capacity, efficiency, and flexibility. 

NASA’s goal is to transfer SMS to the FAA by 

December 2003, for deployment in the Free Flight 

Phase 2 program to modernize the National Air 

Space through the introduction of new technologies 

and procedures. The first SMS simulation (September 2001) evaluated the effectiveness of SMS alone. 

The second simulation’s goal was twofold: to test the 

combined functionalities of SMS and TMA, and to 

further evaluate the SMS concept and performance. 

TMA, currently in use at the Fort Worth Center, 

is one of the Center-TRACON (Terminal Radar 

Approach Control) Automation System tools. It 

assists TRACON and Center traffic management 

coordinators (TMCs) in arrival flow management 

planning. SMS helps tower controllers and TMCs 

manage departures. The successful linking of SMS’s 

departure management and TMA’s arrival management may improve the overall efficiency of an airport.

Simulation 

The east side of Dallas/Fort Worth International 

Airport (DFW) served as the test bed for the simulation study. Five certified professional controllers from 

the DFW tower, including a TMC and a supervisor, 

participated in the simulation, controlling simulated 

aircraft from the east tower. Two other tower controllers from Memphis and Norfolk, VA, airports, as well 

as representatives from several air carriers observed 

portions of the simulation and provided additional 

feedback.

Three of the experiment’s six days were dedicated to interviewing the controllers in order to better 

understand how controllers managed traffic under 

Controllers managing DFW east side traffic in 

FutureFlight Central, with SMS displays visible.
Aviation Systems Division 15

Kennedy Space Center Tower and Console

Dr. Dawn Elliott, NASA Kennedy Space Center; Ken Christensen, Mike Madson, 

Boris Rabin, Betty Silva, NASA ARC; Doug Ernest, Northrop Grumman IT

Summary

A new air traffic control tower is planned for the 

Kennedy Space Center Shuttle Landing Facility 

(SLF). This tower will improve safety and efficiency 

of operations during Space Shuttle landings. FutureFlight Central developed a virtual model of the new 

tower so that the design could be evaluated by users, 

thus validating an optimum tower position and interior 

cab configuration before beginning construction.

Introduction

Located at Cape Canaveral, Florida, and specially 

designed for landing NASA Space Shuttle Orbiters, 

the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Shuttle Landing 

Facility first opened for flights in 1976. Recently, KSC 

has planned a more modern control tower that will 

make Shuttle operations safer and more efficient.

FutureFlight created a virtual model of the SLF 

so that KSC could evaluate design choices before 

beginning construction on the new tower. The simulation objectives were to: 

l validate the selected location and height of the

 proposed tower;

l obtain the most usable tower interior design by

 employing human factors analysis; and 

l check for visual obstructions at various tower

 heights.

Simulation 

FutureFlight staff developed the 3D model used 

to create the out-of-the-window view of KSC. The 

day scene featured vegetation lining the runways 

and swampy areas; the night scene depicted runway 

lights and xenon searchlights, thus virtually mirroring 

the actual environment. FutureFlight also added the 

Orbiter, the Shuttle carrier, and unique ground support vehicles as new models for this simulation. Other 

typical KSC aircraft which were modeled included 

T-38s, G-2s, 747s, and helicopters.

KSC controllers, using the new tower location’s 

view, were able to evaluate three prospective interior 

tower cab configurations under varying visibility and 

weather conditions while virtual aircraft took off and 

landed. In addition, various tower heights and locations were tested.

Results

FutureFlight successfully met KSC’s requirements 

for the simulation of its new tower: the tower location 

was confirmed, various bush and tree obstructions 

were noted for future abatement, and an optimum 

interior tower design was selected. Additionally, 

the simulation allowed controllers to interact with 

their new workplace and learn how to operate with 

increased safety and efficiency in the new environment.

Ed Taff, NASA Shuttle Launch Facility Operations Manager, noted: “FutureFlight Central is a 

unique NASA capability. It will optimize the working 

environment...and offer future safety training opportunities. We are fortunate to have this facility available 

to us as we start our new tower.” Dr. Dawn Elliott, 

KSC Principal Investigator, added, “To conduct a 

true assessment, it is important to be able to closely 

replicate the workplace–here lies the strength of this 

simulator.”

In FY 2003, KSC is planning several training simulations, taking advantage of the already-created SLF 

visual database and unique aircraft models at NASA 

Ames. In this way, controllers can be trained virtually 

in preparation for Orbiter landings.

Investigative Team

NASA Kennedy Space Center

NASA ARC

Northrop Grumman IT

The virtual Space Shuttle Orbiter lands in full view in the 

FutureFlight Central tower.
16 Aviation Systems Division 

of the local geological features, providing a basis for 

further field exploration.

Return of the data from the remote sites was a 

complex task involving the Ames Mobile Exploration 

System computing and wireless communications 

infrastructure and a satellite link jointly provided by 

Simon Fraser University and the Communication 

Research Centre of Canada. Once the digital images 

reached FutureFlight Central, they were uploaded 

to its supercomputer, SGI’s Onyx 2 Reality Monster. 

A script was written to detect new images, make 

necessary modifications, and then, in near real-time, 

display them in the 360-degree visual system. 

To complete the experiment, a geologist in the 

field, wearing a spacesuit prototype, surveyed the 

same sites visited by the field staff on ATVs.

Results

Detailed results are pending. However, “One thing 

is already clear,” said Principal Investigator Geoffrey 

Briggs, “Our science team found that the panoramic 

perspective of FutureFlight Central provided them 

with excellent situational awareness.” Based on 

observational studies in the tower cab, improvements 

to the software may include more navigational, image 

processing, and rock/soil sample cataloging tools.

This research demonstrated an alternative use of 

FutureFlight Central’s visual display system. Furthermore, the ability of the facility to receive and display 

remote-sensing data represents a building block 

towards a potential future in which real air traffic control could be enhanced using virtual technology.

Investigative Team

NASA ARC

University of Tennessee 

Auburn University

SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) Institute

Simon Fraser University

Titan

QSS Group, Inc. 

Foothill Community College District (FCCD)

Northrop Grumman IT

Human-Operated Robotic Science Evaluation

Brian Glass, Geoff Briggs, Richard Alena, Kelly Snook, Mike Madson, NASA ARC; Jeff Moersch, University 

of Tennessee; Jim Saunders, Auburn University; Virginia Gulick, SETI; Stephen Braham, Simon Fraser 

University; Jen Jasper, Titan; Lori Blaauw, QSS Group, Inc; Samantha Domville, 

Victor Rundquist, FCCD; Claudine Herbelin, Northrop Grumman IT

One of many panoramic images transmitted from the 

Canadian High Arctic for display in FutureFlight Central.

Summary

Emulating remote science on Mars, field staff from 

the Human-Operated Robotic Science Evaluation 

Project transmitted live panoramic images from the 

Canadian Arctic to FutureFlight Central’s 360-degree 

tower screens. The research team studied the 

degree to which reducing communications time delay 

between controllers and robotic rovers could increase 

scientific productivity of remote exploration on Mars’ 

surface.

Introduction

Since 1997, geologists and biologists from the 

Haughton-Mars Project have been studying the 

Haughton Crater located on Devon Island in the 

Canadian High Arctic. Researchers have chosen this 

site because it is an unusually good Mars analog: 

a well-preserved meteorite impact crater in a frigid, 

glaciated region with thick underlying permafrost. 

The conditions there approximate those of the Mars 

environment at present or earlier in its history. 

Future Mars exploration will be carried out by 

robots controlled from Earth, and the minimum twoway communication delay between Earth and remote 

robots will be many minutes. When human exploration of Mars begins, crews will operate with much 

faster communications between themselves and 

their robotic rovers. As part of the effort to prepare for 

eventual Mars exploration, the project team studied 

the degree to which reducing communications time 

delay between controllers and robots could increase 

the productivity of remote exploration on Mars’ surface. 

To accomplish this goal, field staff transmitted live 

panoramic images from the Canadian High Arctic 

to FutureFlight Central’s 360-degree tower screens, 

thus connecting by satellite the field team with 

geologists in FutureFlight’s 360-degree field-of-view 

simulator.

Experiment

Researchers compared three conditions: baseline data collected by a geologist in the field last 

year; remotely-obtained data; and time-limited data, 

emulating what might be obtained by a human in a 

spacesuit prototype. The all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) 

in the field were operated by humans obeying remote 

commands; this mimicked the action of robotic 

rovers. The scientists at Ames, using written instructions, directed the movement of the ATVs in order 

to collect panoramic, standard, and close-up digital 

views. Each remote image increased understanding 
Aviation Systems Division 17

Crew Vehicle Systems

Research Facility

The Crew Vehicle Systems Research Facility, a 

unique national research resource, was designed for 

the study of human factors in aviation safety. The facility 

analyzes performance characteristics of flight crews, formulates principles and design criteria for future aviation environments, evaluates new and contemporary air traffic control procedures, and develops new training and 

simulation techniques required by the continued technical evolution of flight systems.

Studies have shown that human error plays a part in 60 to 80 percent of all aviation accidents. The Crew 

Vehicle Systems Research Facility allows scientists to study how errors are made, as well as the effects of 

automation, advanced instrumentation, and other factors, such as fatigue, on human performance in aircraft. The facility includes two flight simulators, an FAA certified Level D Boeing 747-400 and an Advanced 

Concepts Flight Simulator, as well as a simulated Air Traffic Control System. Both flight simulators are 

capable of full-mission simulation.

 CVSRF

 PROJECT

 SUMMARIES
18 Aviation Systems Division 

Generalized Predictive Control for Reconfigurable Flight Control

Don Soloway, Karen Gundy-Burlet, Krishna Kumar, NASA ARC; 

Don Bryant, Ramesh Panda, David Brown, Northrup Grumman IT 

Summary

The purpose of this study was to compare the 

Neural Flight Control System (NFCS) design with the 

non-adaptive Generalized Predictive Control (GPC) 

system design for reconfigurable control of a damaged aircraft. Preliminary results showed that the 

GPC system performed as well as the NFCS.

Introduction

NFCSs are processing systems that do not require 

explicitly defined characteristics relating input to 

output; rather, they are capable of learning the relationship between input to a system and the resulting 

output by analysis of desired system behavior. In the 

Fall of 2000, the Integrated Neural Flight Propulsion 

Control System (INFPCS) experiment was conducted 

to examine the effectiveness of NFCS as a means of 

controlling a damaged aircraft.

GPC uses predictive control schemes that are 

based on a general model of how an aircraft will 

respond. In this scheme, the predictive controller 

works with reference inputs (the pilot’s control inputs) 

and calculates necessary changes to the aircraft control surface positions; this achieves a corresponding 

reference trajectory that fulfills the intent of the pilot’s 

control input. By focusing on the reference trajectory 

called for by pilot input, the effects of modeling errors, 

over-and under-parameterization, sensor noise, 

system response lags and any effects of aircraft 

damage are overcome.

This experiment was a follow-on to the INFPCS 

study. The goal of this study was to investigate an 

alternative approach to NFCS capable of automatically compensating for aircraft damage or failures. 

Such a development could reduce the costs associated with flight control law development. Specifically, 

researchers used this experiment to compare NFCS 

and GPC under various failure conditions and also to 

examine the handling qualities of both controllers.

Simulation

The Advanced Concepts Flight Simulator (ACFS) 

was used as the test platform. The ACFS simulates 

a Boeing 757-class generic commercial air transport 

with a wide body, a T-tail, low wings, and twin turbofan engines located beneath the wings.

The tests performed consisted of selected flight 

maneuvers as well as approach and landing scenarios. The performance of three different controllers 

was evaluated under normal flight and simulated 

failure conditions. An additional control authority was 

developed using symmetric ailerons for pitch control. 

Simulated failures included frozen flight control surfaces and a failed engine.

 Evaluation criteria was based on handling quality 

ratings for pitch and roll acquisition tasks, fine tracking tasks, and approach and landing tasks. Audio and 

video recordings were made of the test runs, and a 

specified set of data was collected using the simulator’s built-in data collection system.

Results

Seventy test runs were flown by NASA test pilots 

over a three-day period. GPC and NFCS were compared both with and without adaptation. These initial 

tests show the GPC to be as powerful as an adaptive 

system and suggest that a non-adaptive controller 

can work as well as an adaptive controller.

Investigative Team

NASA ARC

Northrop Grumman IT

View of ACFS cockpit and displays.
Aviation Systems Division 19

Aircraft Hazard Table Development for Turbulence Prediction and 

Warning Systems

James Watson, NASA LaRC; Terry Rager, NASA ARC; 

Paul Robinson, Roland Bowles, Bill Buck, AeroTech Research (USA), Inc.; 

Diane Carpenter, Jerry Jones, Jim Miller, Charlie Ross, Ghislain Saillant, Northrop Grumman IT 

Summary

Researchers generated data to aid in the development of a hazard table for four-engine, heavy transport aircraft. The hazard table will subsequently be 

used in conjunction with turbulence detection systems to decrease in-air, turbulence-related accidents.

Introduction

Federal Aviation Administration data show that 

turbulence is the primary cause of in-flight injuries in 

non-fatal accidents. Furthermore, while turbulence 

alone doesn’t cause crashes, it can set off a cascade 

of events that ultimately lead to disaster. To address 

the problem of in-flight turbulence, NASA has established a Turbulence Element under the Aviation 

Safety Program. As part of its mission, the Turbulence Element mandates the development of a turbulence warning system. To function effectively, this 

system will require hazard tables for different classes 

of aircraft. These hazard tables will ultimately work 

in concert with turbulence detection systems to 

predict the stresses on aircraft in a given turbulence 

scenario. Turbulence that is predicted to generate 

“g-loads” in excess of safe limits will be avoided by 

pilots in flight; conversely, pilots will be able to save 

time by not avoiding areas of turbulence predicted to 

generate acceptable g-loads. SimLabs is helping to 

fulfill Turbulence Element requirements by supplying 

data for the development of a hazard table for the 

“four-engine, heavy transport” class of aircraft using 

its 747-400 Level D simulator.

Simulation

 Simulations were performed for 144 different turbulence scenarios generated by a turbulence spectral 

model. The scenarios depicted turbulence that was 

considered likely to be encountered during normal 

operation of a 747-400. Several variables, including 

vertical acceleration response of the 747-400 to wind 

gusts (Figure 1), the aircraft’s inboard elevator angle, 

and the pitch and roll of the aircraft body were measured. Data and pilot comments were collected, and 

calculations were performed to estimate hazard table 

values. 

Results

Data for the 144 test conditions were successfully 

collected. The information generated in this study will 

be used in conjunction with performance characteristics, altitude, true airspeed, and vehicle weight to 

determine hazard tables for individual aircraft types 

and fulfill a critical requirement of the Turbulence Element of NASA’s Aviation Safety Program.

Investigative Team

NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC)

NASA ARC

AeroTech Research (USA), Inc.

Northrop Grumman IT

Figure 1. Vertical acceleration response of a 747-400 to a 

step gust input.
20 Aviation Systems Division 

Distributed Air-Ground Demonstration 2002

Richard Mogford, Sandy Lozito, Everett Palmer, Vernol Battiste, Walter Johnson, Nancy Smith, Terry Rager, 

NASA ARC; Mietek Steglinski, Steglinski Engineering; Thomas Prevot, San Jose State Univ.; Robert Cornell, 

David Brown, Dave Darling, Ramesh Panda, Gary Uyehara, Dan Wilkins, Ron Lehmer, Joel Rosado, Burnett 

Lee, Mike Izrailov, Marty Pethtel, Tom Crawford, Northrop Grumman IT 

Summary

Distributed Air-Ground (DAG) research examines 

interactions between the airborne flight crew and 

ground-based air traffic controllers. A controller facility 

and several separate locations of simulated piloted 

aircraft were linked to create the air traffic environment. This simulation demonstrated technologies and 

procedures related to DAG concepts in the Advanced 

Concepts Flight Simulator (ACFS). 

Introduction

Distributed Air-Ground research is a part of the 

Advanced Air Transportation Technologies (AATT) 

Project. It explores three aspects of the National 

Airspace System: the flight deck, the Air Traffic Control (ATC) environment, and dispatch. This research 

focuses on human factors.

As part of the research, demonstrations were 

conducted during January, June, and September 

of 2002. Each demonstration built upon the previous one. The goal was to integrate and demonstrate 

incremental improvements in the DAG system. By 

linking the ACFS and the Airspace Operations Laboratory (AOL), pilots and controllers were able to use 

DAG tools in real-time simulation scenarios.

Simulation

SimLabs’ development effort focused on the 

ACFS. Cockpit Display of Traffic Information (CDTI), 

a key element of DAG research, was integrated into 

the ACFS. The CDTI, developed separately by the 

DAG research team, consisted of display graphics 

and both self-separation and conflict logic. All elements were hosted on a Windows PC. Two PCs were 

used to drive the captain’s and first officer’s displays. 

The CDTI display graphics were video switched into 

the Navigation Display (ND) locations in the ACFS 

cockpit. The CDTI computers were interfaced to the 

ACFS host simulation via the Aeronautical Datalink 

and Radar System (ADRS). The ADRS, in turn, 

acted as a gateway to the simulated air traffic and 

the Center and Terminal Radar Approach Control 

(TRACON) environments remotely located in the 

AOL.

The ACFS integrated new versions of CDTI and 

ADRS as they evolved. For the June demo, ADRS 

was integrated into the most current ACFS configuration. Changes were also made to the flight management system of the ACFS to accommodate new 

datalink messages and to improve vertical navigation 

(VNAV) performance.

A separate project team was created to improve 

the communications link between the Crew Vehicle 

Systems Research Facility (CVSRF) and the AOL. 

Previous experiments reported severe echo feedback 

and voice clipping when using Voice Over Internet 

Protocol to connect the CVSRF audio system with 

the AOL audio system. The team was able to identify and correct a number of hardware problems, as 

well as create a new radio model for the ACFS ASTi 

system; this resulted in a reliable connection for an 

ACFS VHF radio with multiple controller stations in 

the AOL. 

The ACFS was linked to the AOL for the demonstration runs. The AOL provided the simulated air 

traffic and the Center and TRACON controllers. Flight 

crews flew the ACFS during the scenarios employing 

DAG tools. The CDTI airborne logic was used in the 

Center environment to self-separate traffic conflicts. 

Self-spacing speed algorithms developed by NASA 

Langley were available in the Approach phase of 

flight to examine increased traffic flow.

The Crew Activity Tracking System was integrated 

into the setup and used to collect data for the final 

demonstration in September. Data was also collected 

with the ACFS built-in data collection system.

Results

The ACFS’s DAG system was successfully 

improved with each demonstration. The audio 

system became more robust with the incorporated 

improvements which were made throughout the year. 

Research results are pending.

Investigative Team

NASA ARC

Steglinski Engineering

CDTI display during a traffic alert.
Aviation Systems Division 21

to select, modify, and execute all failures and restore 

the aircraft to a non-failed state. These included 

the capability to fail flaps independently, as well as 

symmetrically, and to fail the rudder in the reverse 

condition relative to pilot input. The EOS Malfunctions Page was enhanced to add the newly created 

failures. A new Aircraft Set Page was also created on 

the EOS to adjust cargo and fuel weights as well as 

the center of gravity of the airplane model.

Results

Audio responses of the pilot were recorded, as 

was video of the out-the-window visual display and 

selected aircraft cockpit instrumentation. Time histories collected by the ACFS data collection system 

included pilot inputs, failure modes, and aircraft 

dynamics, such as, weight, inertia, control surface 

position, and engine performance. Parameters of 

interest to the intelligent flight control system were 

also recorded for further analysis.

The integration of the NFCS controller with the 

C-17 aircraft model was successful. The controller 

noticeably improved the flight characteristics of the 

aircraft in the presence of failed surfaces. This effort 

will facilitate future research on the application of the 

NFCS to the C-17 model and lay the groundwork for 

reconfigurable control design applications on a joint 

Air Force/NASA C-17 research aircraft.

Investigative Team

NASA ARC

Northrop Grumman IT

QSS Group, Inc.

C-17 Neural Flight Control System

Karen Gundy-Burlet, Krishna Kumar, Craig Pires, NASA ARC; 

Dan Renfroe, Bob Cornell, Ramesh Panda, David Brown, David Darling, Northrop Grumman IT;

Don Bryant, Greg Limes, QSS Group, Inc. 

NFCS experiment control page.

Summary

The Neural Flight Control System (NFCS), previously developed on the Advanced Concepts Flight 

Simulator (ACFS), was integrated with the C-17 

aircraft model installed using the Integrated Vehicle 

Modeling Environment (IVME) architecture. Simulated flight tests were conducted to document the 

airplane’s characteristics and evaluate its handling 

qualities in normal and abnormal modes. The NFCS 

noticeably improved the controllability of the aircraft 

when impaired by failed control surfaces.

Introduction

In the wake of recent commercial airliner accidents, NASA is pursuing the development of intelligent flight control systems that will allow alternative control of aircraft should the primary systems 

malfunction or fail. The C-17 cargo transport was 

selected as the model system for use in these developments, and a representative C-17 model was integrated into the ACFS adaptive architecture in 2001.

This experiment was a follow-up study to the 

Integrated Neural Flight Propulsion Control System 

(INFPCS) experiment conducted during the previous fiscal year. The goal of this simulation was to 

integrate the existing ACFS damage-adaptive control 

systems with the C-17 model and then document the 

handling characteristics under normal and abnormal 

conditions. 

Simulation

The ACFS was used as the test platform. The simulation model was a wide-body, fly-by-wire C-17 military transport. The aircraft has a four-engine, highwing, T-tail configuration. Simulated failure conditions 

consisted of flight control surface failures (e.g., select 

actuators becoming jammed at a fixed position) and 

aircraft damage modeled as shifts in the center-ofgravity. NASA test pilots evaluated handling qualities 

(using Cooper-Harper ratings) during select maneuvers and approach and landing scenarios. Audio and 

video recordings were made of the test runs, and 

data were collected using the simulator’s built-in data 

collection system. 

Several new capabilities were added to the 

ACFS. The lower Engine Indication and Crew Alerting System display’s Surface Position Indicator 

was changed to toggle between the C-17 and the 

Advanced Concepts Transport (default aircraft model) 

aircraft configurations, displaying the appropriate 

number of surfaces for the selected aircraft. Additionally, the Experiment Operator Station (EOS) was 

enhanced to allow the IVME C-17 experiment page 
22 Aviation Systems Division 

FAA Motion

Judith Burki-Cohen, Yongki Go, DOT Volpe Center; Dave Astill, NASA ARC; 

William Chung, Jerry Jones, Charlie Ross, Dan Renfroe, Dave Lambert, Ghislain Saillant, 

Diane Carpenter, Jim Miller, Norm Gray, Tom Standifur, Northrop Grumman IT

Summary

This study was part of a joint program by NASA, 

the Department of Transportation (DOT) Volpe 

Center, and the FAA to use the B747-400 Level D 

flight simulator to investigate motion cueing effects in 

transfer of training.

Introduction

The FAA is considering a requirement that will 

mandate simulator use for all airline pilot training, 

testing, and checking. Researchers conducted this 

experiment to investigate whether the effects of 

motion aid transfer of training. A previous FAA experiment concluded that platform motion did not have 

an effect on transfer of training for the maneuvers 

tested, but concerns were raised on the quality of 

the motion cues provided by the test simulator. This 

experiment’s objective was to eliminate these concerns by using the NASA Ames FAA Level D-certified 

B747-400 simulator, with the simulator adjusted to 

provide more responsive motion cues. Two groups 

of B747-400 pilots flew scenarios designed with the 

specific intent of revealing a difference between the 

effects of motion and no motion.

Simulation

The experiment procedure was comprised of three 

phases: evaluation, training, and transfer testing. All 

three phases contained maneuvers chosen from the 

FAA practical test standards. Four specific maneuvers were selected which, due to their nature, may 

reveal the effect of motion: V1 Cut, V2 Cut, Precision 

Instrument Approach, and Sidestep with a Vertical 

Upset. V1 Cut and V2 Cut involve one-engine failure 

during take off; Precision Instrument Approach and 

Sidestep are approach and landing tasks.

Test runs were flown by flight crews consisting of 

either a Captain or First Officer and a non-flying staff 

pilot. Half of the subjects went through training with 

the motion system turned on, and the other half were 

trained without motion. The two subject groups then 

flew a final phase with motion on to compare the 

training effects. Statistical analyses were developed 

to study a specific subset of parameters in the subjects’ performance and workload. 

Results

Forty current and qualified airline pilots participated in the study, and over 600 runs were recorded. 

The data for the experiments are being analyzed, 

and results are pending.

Investigative Team

DOT Volpe Center

NASA ARC

Northrop Grumman IT

The NASA Ames B747 Level D flight simulator is shown 

above. The motion actuator drive equations were tuned to 

use the full range of actuator extension.
Aviation Systems Division 23

Integrated Vehicle Modeling Environment Development II

Karen Gundy-Burlet, Craig Pires, Kalmanje Krishnakumar, Terry Rager, NASA ARC; 

Robert Cornell, David Brown, David Darling, David Lambert, Ramesh Panda, Northrop Grumman IT; Don 

Bryant, Gregory Limes, QSS Group, Inc.

Summary

The Integrated Vehicle Modeling Environment 

(IVME) provides a flexible software architecture to the 

Advanced Concepts Flight Simulator (ACFS) which 

allows for a choice of aircraft models in simulation 

experiments. The Boeing C-17 aircraft model is the 

focus of the current research. Data from this project 

will support the continued integration of a neural flight 

controller into the ACFS.

Introduction

The IVME architecture was implemented in the 

ACFS primarily to support Intelligent Flight Control 

(IFC) research goals. IFC research requires the 

capability to integrate and test neural flight control 

schemes for a variety of civil and military aircraft. 

During the initial IVME development effort in Fiscal 

Year 2001, the ACFS was converted to a flexible, 

multi-airframe simulation architecture, allowing the 

ACFS to simulate a Boeing C-17 transport aircraft in 

addition to the original B757-class Advanced Concepts Transport (ACT). In the second part of this 

ongoing IVME development, additional improvements 

were made to both the simulation infrastructure and 

the C-17 computer models to support the integration 

of a neural flight controller into the ACFS.

Simulation

The ACFS/ACT is a full-mission simulation, representative of a generic B757-class of passenger transport aircraft. It has state-of-the-art avionics, including 

simulated flight displays and a Flight Management 

System. The ACFS/C-17 simulation has its own basic 

aerodynamics, flight controls, engines, and ground 

handling models, but it uses generic ACFS simulation components in cases where the C-17-specific 

components are not provided (e.g., avionics).

In support of this study, further improvements were 

made to the C-17’s aerodynamics, flight controls, and 

engine models. This was done to meet the fidelity 

requirements for the various normal and failure mode 

conditions necessary for integrated tests with the 

neural flight controller. Requirements include the ability to fail individual control surfaces with associated 

aerodynamic effects and implementation of engine 

seizure malfunctions. 

In addition, the default auto throttle controller was 

modified to work with the C-17 model. Flight deck displays, including the Head-Up Display, were modified 

to provide added functionality and symbology more 

closely depicting C-17 data. The experiment scenario 

control and aircraft configuration set pages in the 

Experimenter Operator Station were also tailored for 

the C-17 and experiment-specific functionality.

The side stick and pedal control force characteristics were completely redesigned to provide desirable handling qualities for ACT operations, as well as 

meet the C-17-specific requirements. In the case of 

the C-17, the control rates in pitch, roll, and yaw were 

matched with US Air Force Acceptance Test Guide 

(ATG) data for the aircraft.

A significant emphasis was placed on model 

verification by setting up and running C-17/ATG test 

cases. These tests included take off and landing, 

pitch, roll and yaw response characteristics. Additional tests to verify engine acceleration, deceleration, and gear change dynamics were also generated.

Results

Development for this activity was completed in 

August 2002. Piloted runs are tentatively scheduled 

for FY 03.

Investigative Team

NASA ARC

Northrop Grumman IT

QSS Group, Inc. 

ACFS/C-17 Surface Position display.
24 Aviation Systems Division 
Aviation Systems Division 25

Vertical Motion Simulator

Research Facility

The Vertical Motion Simulator 

Complex is a world-class research 

and development facility offering 

unparalleled capabilities for conducting 

some of the most exciting and 

challenging aerospace studies and 

experiments. The six-degree-offreedom VMS, with its 60-foot vertical 

and 40-foot lateral motion capability, 

is the world's largest motion-base 

simulator. The large amplitude motion 

system of the VMS was designed 

to aid in research issues relating 

to controls, guidance, displays, 

automation, and handling qualities of 

existing or proposed aircraft. It is an 

excellent tool for investigating issues 

relevant to nap-of-the-earth flight, 

landing and rollout studies, Vertical 

Take Off and Landing (VTOL), Short 

Take Off/Vertical Landing (STOVL), 

and Super-Short Take Off and Landing 

(SSTOL).

 VMS

 PROJECT

 SUMMARIES
26 Aviation Systems Division 

HMD, collect and display data for the flight tasks, 

and provide guidance symbology to the pilot on the 

HMD. SimLabs developed real-time graphics for the 

Comanche and Apache symbologies, lab data displays, static map, and Comanche flight instruments. 

Sikorsky drive laws for the Comanche symbology 

were integrated into the graphics program, and drive 

laws were coded for the Apache symbology. The new 

magnetic head tracker and HMD system were integrated and tested thoroughly prior to simulation use. 

For additional information, please refer to the “Polhemus Head Tracking System (PHTS) Motion Study” 

elsewhere in this report.

Results

Seven pilots used the HMD with the two different 

symbologies to fly the simulated Comanche helicopter. The experiment was successful, completing 866 

data runs and accomplishing all objectives. 

Results of the investigation, in terms of performance, handling qualities, workload, and pilot 

comments, produced results for which the numerical 

differences between the two symbologies were small 

and the symbology sets yielded categorically similar 

data. This simulation is the first step of a series of 

evaluations which will be increasingly operationallyrelevant in context.

Investigative Team

U.S. Army

Turpin Technologies

San Jose State University Foundation

Northrup Grumman IT

Comanche Helmet-Mounted Display (HMD) Simulation

Adolph Atencio and R. Jay Shively, US Army; Terry Turpin, Turpin Technologies; 

Susan Dowell, San Jose State University Foundation; Robert Morrison, Chuck Perry, 

Estela Hernandez, Shelley Larocca, Russ Sansom, Dan Wilkins, Northrup Grumman IT

Summary

 This purpose of this simulation was to compare 

performance of the Comanche flight symbology with 

that of the Apache symbology. Emphasis was placed 

on the differences in heading tapes and horizon lines. 

This simulation is considered a first step in a series of 

symbology evaluations.

Introduction

The Comanche is the U.S. Army’s next generation 

scout and attack helicopter and the cornerstone of 

the Army’s Force XXI Aviation Modernization Plan. 

The Comanche makes use of the latest advancements in technology, including a binocular HMD 

known as the Helmet Integrated Display Sighting 

System (HIDSS). The HIDSS will serve as the pilot’s 

primary flight display and uses newly-developed symbology designed to meet the demands of flying the 

aircraft in all weather and lighting conditions.

Preliminary tests of the Comanche HMD symbology by Army test pilots revealed issues regarding 

the HIDSS’s new symbology presentation style. The 

simulations conducted at the Vertical Motion Simulator (VMS) addressed these concerns by comparing 

pilot performance using both the new Comanche 

contact analog symbology (wherein symbols appear 

to overlay the real-world objects they represent) and 

the standard Apache compressed symbology under 

identical flight scenarios. 

Simulation

The principal objectives of the simulation were to 

study the Comanche implementation of the heading 

tape, address issues associated with its implementation, and assess symbology usability. To conduct the 

evaluation, each pilot flew the simulated Comanche 

while wearing the Comanche helmet upon which a 

sensor was mounted for tracking head movement. 

The pilot used the Comanche symbology to fly several runs and perform assigned flight tasks. For all 

runs, the helicopter’s automatic flight control system 

and forward-looking infrared visual system were 

used. The pilot then repeated the same runs using 

the Apache symbology.

To prepare for the simulation, SimLabs personnel 

modified an RAH-66 simulation model (previously 

developed at NASA ARC) to implement and validate Boeing’s latest flight control system. Engineers 

developed software to use head tracker information to drive the visual scene and symbology on the 

Pilots were shown an out-the-window view similar to this 

one while participating in the simulation.
Aviation Systems Division 27

Boeing Advanced Theater Transport (ATT)

Ken Rossitto, Edmond Field, Todd Williams, The Boeing Company; 

James Franklin, Chad Frost, NASA ARC; Gordon Hardy, Philip Tung, 

Emily Lewis, Steve Belsley, Joe Ogwell, Ron Gerdes, Northrop Grumman IT

Summary

The ATT is an aircraft concept designed for SuperShort Take Off and Landing (SSTOL) operation. The 

Boeing ATT 187-202 model used for this experiment 

was a tilt-wing design with four propellers attached by 

nacelles to the leading edge of the main wing. This 

study investigated flight control system configurations 

and landing requirements. The ATT simulation model 

was developed entirely with Matlab/Simulink Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) software.

Introduction

Military operations are increasingly taking place 

in austere settings; consequently, there is a growing need for transports that can travel long distance, 

carry sizeable payloads, and operate on short, unprepared runways. The ATT is a next-generation military 

tactical transport that could serve as a replacement 

for the aging C-130 fleet. Using an ATT model that 

was developed entirely with off-the-shelf software, 

researchers designed the simulation to provide 

control system guidelines and to determine landing 

requirements for the new aircraft.

Simulation 

The Boeing ATT 187-202 model was used for 

this experiment. It is a tilt-wing configuration with 

four propellers attached by nacelles to the leading 

edge of the main wing. Critical design factors for this 

aircraft include the control authority, control actuation 

rates, and control response types required to perform 

SSTOL operations in demanding weather conditions. 

Current information comes from Short Take Off and 

Landing (STOL) flight and simulation experience 

collected over three decades ago, and it relates to 

aircraft configurations with conventional aerodynamic 

surfaces, mechanical controls, simple rate damper 

type stability augmentation systems and primitive 

instrument displays. Consequently, the first stage of 

the simulation focused on obtaining pilots’ evaluation 

for a range of control response type characteristics 

and levels of static longitudinal and directional stability specific to the ATT. The modern designs employed 

in this simulation made full use of digital fly-by-wire 

controls and electronic displays, and the basic aerodynamic configuration tended toward relaxed static 

stability with minimal or no tail surfaces. 

The second stage of the simulation concentrated 

on landing performance. SSTOL operations requiring 

high precision landing touchdowns have generally 

used a no-flare technique to minimize longitudinal 

touchdown dispersions. However, the resulting high 

touchdown sink rates impose significant weight, 

volume, and complexity penalties on landing gear 

design. The use of a full or partial landing flare was 

investigated as a means of increasing touchdown 

accuracy. Additionally, the effect of a high precision 

flared landing on pilot workload was investigated. 

Simulations were conducted for a total of five 

weeks on the motion base. In preparation for the 

experiments, two weeks of fixed-base simulations 

were performed to validate the simulation system 

response and finalize flight tasks and scenarios.

Boeing supplied the ATT Simulink block diagrams, 

and VMS personnel converted the diagrams to C 

code by using a COTS real-time code generator. 

This reduced both simulation development time and 

costs to the customer. Ames-developed Head-Up 

and Head-Down Displays (from previous simulations) 

were integrated with the real-time C code and VMS 

real-time FORTRAN structure. Additionally, a new 

visual database was built and used for this study.

Results

The simulation met all the research objectives 

and also generated considerable data for design 

analysis and evaluation. Test pilots and engineers 

were favorably impressed with the important role that 

large motion cueing played in evaluating the SSTOL 

class of aircraft. They were also impressed with the 

efficiency of VMS personnel and their ability to build 

a new simulation from scratch. The proprietary nature 

of this project precludes the inclusion of detailed 

results in this report. For more information, refer 

to the web page http://www.boeing.com/phantom/

att.html. 

Investigative Team

The Boeing Company - Phantom Works

NASA ARC

Northrup Grumman IT

The ATT features a tilt-wing configuration.
28 Aviation Systems Division 

Summary

Simulations of the Space Shuttle Orbiter were 

performed at the Vertical Motion Simulator (VMS) to 

provide landing and rollout training for the astronaut 

corps. Upgrades were made to the math model to 

increase its fidelity.

Introduction

The Space Shuttle Orbiter is simulated every nine 

months at the VMS. Researchers have examined 

issues such as modifications to the flight-control 

system, flight rules, and the basic simulation model. 

The simulations also provide astronaut training with 

realistic landing and rollout scenarios.

Simulation

Training was provided for upcoming mission crews 

through a series of flights. Various runways, visibility conditions, and wind conditions were simulated, 

and system failures were periodically introduced. 

The math model was enhanced by including the 

latest software upgrades to the Head-Down Displays 

(HDD), a wind estimation indicator on a HDD, a new 

option for the speedbrake logic, the ability to induce 

Head-Up Display (HUD) symbology misalignment, 

and additional wind profiles. Two end-of-run data displays were also redesigned to provide more information to both the crew and the researchers.

Some pilots flew a demonstration of Transoceanic 

Abort Landing (TAL) sites with reduced landing aides. 

Combinations of the Ball-Bar, HUD, and the Precision 

Approach Path Indicator lights were disabled for the 

demonstration. Pilots were asked to rate the difficulty 

in landing under such conditions in an effort to determine the impact on mission safety.

Modifications to the Head-Down Multifunction 

Electronic Display Subsystem were made to conform to the latest upgrades in the Orbiter. Changing 

display colors and some data units have increased 

Space Shuttle Vehicle 2002-1

Howard Law, Greg C. Johnson, Chris Ferguson, George Zamka, Ron Garan, NASA JSC; 

Ed Digon, Boeing North American; Peter Dailey, Lockheed Martin; Jim Harder, United Space Alliance; Jeff 

Homan, Estela Hernandez, Northrop Grumman IT

Space Shuttle landings are simulated every nine months 

at the VMS.

display readability and consistency to better assist 

the crew in landing. 

An on-board wind estimator was implemented. 

Winds during the final phase of entry directly affect 

energy conditions while flying around the Heading 

Alignment Cone (HAC) and at touchdown. Currently, 

no onboard information regarding wind magnitude 

and direction is available to the crew. The crews 

evaluated the wind estimator for potential implementation on the actual Orbiter.

The speedbrake model was updated to include 

changes made to the Shuttle’s software. A new shortfield speedbrake option for runways less than 8500 

feet long was added. This option allows the Orbiter 

to touch down at slower speeds to stop safely when 

using shorter runways. This capability is important 

in an abort situation where the available runway is 

shorter than nominal.

Researchers also requested the capability to 

induce a HUD misalignment, because this occurred 

during one of the actual Shuttle flights. Modifications 

to the code were made to simulate a hardware misalignment of 0.5 degrees in azimuth on the HUD.

Finally, the STS-108 actual flight wind profile was 

reproduced in the simulation and flown by the crew 

during their training. 

Results

During the four weeks of the simulation, thirty-eight 

pilots flew 779 training runs. Ten mission specialists 

also received training in the jumpseat. All objectives 

were met for the four-week training. Based upon pilot 

comments, the crew familiarization phase reinforced 

the importance of the VMS in preparing upcoming 

crews for the landing and rollout phase of the mission 

and for possible failures during that phase.

All math model upgrades were successfully verified for future use. The TAL Landing Aides Demonstration was completed with two pilots flying 40 data

runs. Based on the data and pilot ratings, researchers have concluded that the model at the VMS is 

ready for a full study of reduced landing aides in the 

future. 

Investigative Team

NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC)

Boeing North American

Lockheed Martin Engineering and Services Corp.

United Space Alliance

Northrop Grumman IT
Aviation Systems Division 29

The turbulence data were extracted to generate a set 

of transfer functions representing the gusts.

During the GEM testing, pilots flew the matrix of 

four turbulence levels with both head and crosswinds, hovering in front of the CGS for two minutes. 

Data and pilot comments were used to assess the 

realism and validity of the GEM model. For comparison, equivalent runs were completed using SORBET.

Sikorsky’s Modern Control Laws (MCLAW) were 

delivered in Matlab Simulink diagrams which were 

used to generate model code. An interface was 

developed so that Sikorsky variables could be 

changed and monitored in real-time. The task matrix 

was comprised of five maneuvers (depart/abort, 

hover, lateral reposition, pirouette, and vertical) and 

included flights with the MCLAWs and the baseline 

UH-60 SAS. Each task was flown with a daytime 

scene, as well as at night with night vision goggles. 

Time-history data, pilot comments, and CooperHarper handling quality ratings were recorded to 

evaluate the effectiveness of the new SAS.

Results

Six pilots performed 569 data runs. Pilots reported 

that the GEM turbulence was very realistic. With 

these promising results, the researchers are pursuing 

implementing the GEM model on the RASCAL helicopter. The Sikorsky’s MCLAWs showed an overall 

improvement in handling qualities for all pilots and 

all maneuvers. Pilot comments were favorable, also, 

when flying in the degraded visual environment.

Investigative Team

US Army (AFDD)

Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation

Northrop Grumman IT

Modern Turbulence

Chris Blanken, Jeff Lusardi, US Army; Vineet Sahasrabudhe, Sikorsky; Steve Belsley, Pat Burnside, Estela 

Hernandez, Emily Lewis, Northrop Grumman IT

When wind flows around a large structure, such as a 

hangar, turbulent airflow is created.

Summary

The Modern Turbulence program was a helicopter 

handling qualities simulation focusing on turbulence 

modeling for rotorcraft and modern control laws for 

the UH-60 Black Hawk. A new turbulence model 

and advanced Stability Augmentation System (SAS) 

control laws were implemented. Along with collective tactile cueing, the control laws were tested for 

improving handling qualities and reducing workload 

in a degraded visual environment.

Introduction

Typically, turbulence models have been based 

on fixed-wing aircraft and are not valid near hover. 

Therefore, helicopter handling quality testing considering the effects of turbulence is challenging. The 

Army Aeroflightdynamics Directorate (AFDD) of the 

US Army Aviation and Missile Command developed 

a new technique--the Gust Extraction to Mixer (GEM) 

transfer function--to extract the gust characteristics 

from helicopter flight test data. A gust model generated from this method for a hovering UH-60 was 

used in this study.

The control system for the current fleet of Black 

Hawks was designed for daytime flight in good visual 

conditions. However, the capability is now needed 

to fly in tight quarters and at night when the visual 

cues, which pilots need for stabilization, are greatly 

reduced. Augmentation of the SAS can compensate 

for loss of these visual cues. The AFDD, in support 

of a National Rotorcraft Technology Center program, 

tasked Sikorsky to design an improved SAS. The 

Modern Turbulence experiment is one step towards 

putting these modern control laws onto the UH-60M 

version of the Black Hawk.

Simulation

In this experiment, researchers used the Gen Hel 

Black Hawk with the baseline UH-60 SAS and the 

established SORBET turbulence model developed 

by SimLabs. The first phase of the experiment tested 

the GEM turbulence model. The second phase 

evaluated Sikorsky’s modern control laws. A number 

of improvements were made to the graphics to add 

realism to the out-the-window scenes. A new model 

of the San Francisco Coast Guard Station was created, and the fidelity of the Moffett Field database 

was increased. Several new task targets were built, 

and the task performance displays were optimized 

through several revisions.

Before the simulation, flight test data were taken 

at the Coast Guard Station (CGS) at San Francisco 

Airport using the building as a turbulence generator. 
30 Aviation Systems Division 

National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)

Bart Elias, Kris Poland, John O’Callaghan, National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB); 

Estela Hernandez, Bob Morrison, Greg Davis, Bill Chung, Northrop Grumman IT

Summary

An evaluation of the Vertical Motion Simulator’s 

(VMS) simulation cueing capability was conducted 

to determine if the VMS could provide the needed 

fidelity to meet future NTSB accident investigation 

requirements.

Introduction

To aid the NTSB in aircraft accident investigations, 

a simulation facility that can recreate the extreme 

flight conditions experienced in accidents with a high 

degree of fidelity would certainly be beneficial. The 

VMS has the world’s largest vertical motion system 

and modular architecture, and, as such, has the 

potential to become a credible asset for the NTSB 

when investigating human-in-the-loop issues related 

to accidents. 

Simulation

Three specific simulation capabilities--motion 

cueing, visual cueing, and aural cueing--were evaluated by the NTSB during this effort. In addition, the 

capability to reproduce control loader characteristics 

was also tested to check the compliance of given 

specifications. 

The VMS’s motion drive algorithms were adjusted 

to reproduce the pilot station acceleration cues experienced under extreme flight conditions. All six-axis 

motion travels in the VMS, including the large vertical 

and lateral travels, were fully utilized to achieve maximum possible motion sensations. The accelerations produced by the VMS matched the NTSB-provided 

time traces very well. 

Various graphic displays, including instrument 

displays, data displays, and out-the-window visual 

scenes, were tested to ensure that the VMS had 

the resources and flexibility to meet NTSB-specified 

visual cueing and data display requirements. Representative flight test runs were conducted to check 

and validate the data collection, display, and analysis 

procedures. A closed audio network was also developed to connect the simulator cockpit and investigator stations, thereby ensuring the security level 

required by the NTSB.

Results

All NTSB-specified cueing requirements were met. 

Based on NTSB investigators’ comments, the NTSB 

was pleased with the capabilities and performance of 

the VMS.

Investigative Team

National Transportation Safety Board 

Northrop Grumman IT

The VMSʼs interchangeable cabs have a full range of 

motion capabilities.

An example of a simulated aircraft subjected to the 

extreme flight conditions of a steep angle.
Aviation Systems Division 31

Virtual Flight Rapid Integration Test Environment IV

Mary Livingston, Jorge Bardina, Susan Cliff, David Kinney, Mark Tischler, Julie Mikula, NASA ARC; Chun 

Tang, Veronica Hawke, ELORET Corp.; John Bunnell, Joe Ogwell, Jeff Homan, Dan Wilkins, Russ Sansom, 

Northrop Grumman IT; Kenny Cheung, Sean Swei, Raytheon 

Summary

The objective of the Virtual Flight Rapid Integration 

Test Environment (VF-RITE) project is to produce 

systems and infrastructure to facilitate the use of 

aerodynamic data [developed using Computational 

Fluid Dynamics (CFD) technology] and other Information Technology (IT) tools in a real-time, piloted 

flight simulation. VF-RITE IV continued to improve 

the RITE process while studying a new version of the 

Slender Hypersonic Aerodynamic Research Probe 

(SHARP) Crew Transfer Vehicle (CTV) developed at 

NASA Ames.

Introduction

The objective of the VF-RITE project is to produce 

systems and infrastructure to facilitate the use of 

aerodynamic data developed using CFD technology 

and IT tools in a real-time, piloted flight simulation. 

The subjective and objective flight simulation data will 

allow the design team to apply “return knowledge” 

from the simulation to improve vehicle performance.

The VF-RITE project is multi-phased. The first 

phase united separate aerodynamic disciplines to 

establish the infrastructure for rapid integration of 

CFD data into flight simulation. The second phase 

involved redesign of the Space Shuttle’s nose for 

back-to-back comparison of cases with different 

geometries and the application of return knowledge 

to the design team. The third phase applied the IT 

tools developed during the first two phases to the 

preliminary design of a SHARP CTV. Specifically, 

RITE III compared newer designs for a SHARP CTV 

with the previously designed HL-20 and the Space 

Shuttle Orbiter. This fourth phase studied the latest 

SHARP concept vehicle, with the goals of improving 

the flight controls and Head-Up Display and of further 

improving the RITE process itself. 

Simulation

A SHARP CTV geometry was designed, and a 

baseline aerodynamic model was developed using 

CFD methods. The flight control system used the 

architecture developed in RITE III and incorporated 

improvements derived from previous pilot comments. 

The control gains were calculated using a control 

system optimization tool. In addition to the Rotational Hand Controllers (RHCs) currently found in 

the Space Shuttle, the simulator was equipped with 

sidestick controllers. Additionally, the CTV’s HUD was 

modified to behave more like the Shuttle’s.

Upon completion of the development process, the 

CTV’s stability, control, and handling qualities were 

evaluated through real-time piloted simulation in the 

Vertical Motion Simulator. Astronaut-pilots flew three 

different approach and landing tasks: a straight-in 

approach with no wind; a lateral offset approach with 

no wind; and a straight-in, 20-kt wind scenario.

The simulation included various options for changing the aerodynamic performance of the CTV in order 

to assess the potential for design improvements. The 

rapid development of a failure mode control reconfiguration was also demonstrated. 

During the simulation, Virtual Laboratory (VLAB) 

was used to allow remote participation by researchers at other facilities. The use of VLAB helped facilitate real-time system analysis between the multiple 

disciplines at different sites.

Results

Design modifications to the SHARP CTV were 

successfully accomplished using the VF-RITE process. This was done via software changes relating to 

the geometry, aerodynamic characteristics, and control systems of the vehicle. Modifications were made 

in support of design and systems analyses to investigate a wide range of lifting body vehicle designs and 

approach procedures. Tools were utilized to enable 

rapid changes to the control system and vehicle 

parameters.

Astronaut-pilots gave Cooper-Harper ratings of the 

various iteration of the simulated vehicles, providing 

input for modifications to the vehicles and feedback 

to the designers. This feedback impacted the designs 

of the control system architectures, landing gear 

location, determination of speed-brake gearing, and 

vehicle lift-over-drag studies. A preliminary control 

inceptor study was also completed during the course 

of this simulation. 

Investigative Team

NASA ARC

ELORET Corporation

Northrop Grumman IT

Raytheon

The SHARP CTV8.
32 Aviation Systems Division 
Aviation Systems Division 33

State-of-the-Art

Simulation Facilities

Providing advanced flight simulation capabilities 

requires continual modernization. To keep pace with 

evolving customer needs, SimLabs strives to optimize 

the simulation systems, from cockpits to computers 

to technology for real-time networking with flight 

simulators and laboratories in remote locations.

RESEARCH & TECHNOLOGY

PROJECTS
34 Aviation Systems Division 

Virtual Airspace Simulation Technology Real-Time (VAST-RT)

Summary

The VAST-RT Project was established to help 

create air traffic management technologies that 

will facilitate an increase in air traffic capacity while 

simultaneously increasing safety and efficiency. 

VAST-RT completed a major milestone in August 

2002 with the delivery of the Preliminary Design 

Review; a preliminary System Description Document 

was subsequently delivered in September. The major 

thrust for this Project now turns from requirements 

gathering and design to constructing the operational 

code through a series of releases and simulations.

Introduction

The capacity of the nation’s air transportation 

system continues to increase, and according to some 

analysts, is expected to double over the next ten 

years. Consequently, much work is being conducted 

to develop and field new decision-support tools with 

the goal of improving the air traffic management 

(ATM) system. These tools, however, are projected 

to provide only incremental improvements to today’s 

ATM system. In order to meet the demands of the 

future, revolutionary technologies must be developed 

to meet the envisioned growth. NASA, working with 

the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), academia, 

and industry, is currently developing a new research 

program which will create air traffic management 

technologies that facilitate the doubling of capacity 

while simultaneously increasing safety and efficiency. 

Much of the preliminary work in this area will be 

conducted under a new project, the Virtual Airspace 

Modeling and Simulation (VAMS) Project.

Project Description

One of the critical elements of the VAMS Project is 

the establishment of a new virtual airspace modeling 

and simulation capability for evaluating ATM concepts 

at both the systems and local levels with the requisite 

degrees of fidelity. This new capability will examine 

critical core component technologies and candidate 

system level concepts and architectures to meet the 

requirements of the air transportation system of the 

future. The goal of this new capability is to provide a 

safe, cost-effective, common, flexible, and accessible 

platform for evaluating human performance issues 

related to the development and implementation of 

future ATM concepts.

The VAST capability consists of two elements: a 

non-real-time modeling and simulation capability and 

a real-time, human-in-the-loop simulation capability. The non-real-time system focuses on the development and validation of models and methods for 

non-real-time assessments of candidate operational 

concepts. Efforts within this element will produce a 

suite of tools composed of interoperable models representing the gate-to-gate actions and highly coupled 

interactions of the key components of the air transportation system. Results and models from the non-realtime element will be applied to VAST-RT.

The VAST real-time simulation will provide a gateto-gate, national-airspace-wide, human-in-the-loop 

simulation capability for the assessment of human 

interactions with airspace operational concepts and 

their supporting technologies. The real-time simulation will ensure that adequate and credible real-time 

models and necessary interfaces to human-in-theloop laboratories and simulators are available to 

perform high-fidelity human performance and human 

factors studies to better understand human/system 

interactions. VAST will provide a national-airspacewide “closed-loop” environment where decisions 

made at the local level propagate to the system level 

and vice versa. VAST will also enhance and expand 

current human-in-the-loop simulation capabilities, 

making them more flexible and extensible. 

Accomplishments and Plans

The VAST-RT Team has completed the requirements definition phase of the Project and has delivered the Preliminary System Description Document 

(SDD) to the Project Office. The SDD provides the 

Project Office and the user community with the 

requirements and preliminary design for the VASTRT product as well as providing theory of operations 

instructions and other supporting documentation. The 

Project emphasis will now shift to producing the items 

described in the SDD and to producing simulations. 

VAST-RT will produce four simulations in FY 03 using 

all of the NASA SimLabs facilities. At the completion 

of each simulation, the VAST-RT Team will have demonstrated a new set of tools and will have provided 

the Project Office with a new capability for use in 

selecting and evaluating the air traffic management/

air traffic control concepts of the future.

Development Team

Scott Malsom, Bill Cleveland, John Griffin, Steve 

Cowart, NASA ARC; Rod Ketchum, FAA; Leighton 

Quon, Ron Lehmer, Carla Ingram, Marty Pethtel, 

Ernie Inn, Paul Chaplin, Bill Chung, Northrop 

Grumman IT
Aviation Systems Division 35

Virtual Laboratory (VLAB)

Summary

VLAB is a suite of tools that extends the real-time 

flight simulation engineering and research capabilities 

of the Vertical Motion Simulator (VMS) beyond the 

physical boundaries of the laboratory and onto the 

remote user’s desktop. With a VLAB client system, 

remote users receive and interact with live, real-time 

flight simulation experiments at the VMS. Currently, 

VLAB clients are supported at Ames Research 

Center (ARC), Johnson Space Center (JSC), and 

Marshall Space Flight Center.

Introduction

The VLAB client system features a fully-navigable 

3D replica of the VMS laboratory. It has the capability of moving beyond the physical walls of the lab 

to obtain a full-scale view of both the VMS and a 

mock-up of an interchangeable cockpit. Navigation 

in the 3D virtual space is accomplished via keyboard 

commands or a joystick. VLAB data displays include 

real-time strip chart displays, an end-of-run data 

monitor, data plots, and two-way white board text 

communication. Visual displays include the 3D laboratory environment (with either a full or orthogonal 

view of the VMS motion system), graphic representations of the out-the window (OTW) display, a chaseplane view, project and simulation engineer control 

panels, and a real-time Heads-Up Display. VLAB also 

provides stereo ambient sound and two-way voice 

intercom between the VMS lab and the remote client. 

Additional component systems are available for video 

conferencing, post-run data analysis, and multi-channel voice communication. 

Project Description

Initial development and implementation of the 

VLAB system was accomplished on a mid-range 

performance workstation. Today’s client systems are 

quickly progressing to desktop and laptop platforms. 

Hence, both the client and server elements have 

recently been ported to laptop platforms. In addition 

to live client systems, a stand-alone demonstration 

version of the VLAB client system has been developed. Wireless networking has been implemented on 

Apple client platforms. This provides a truly “portable” 

client system. 

A number of client configurations have been developed and deployed for various research teams. The 

Space Shuttle client configuration is currently used 

by JSC researchers to participate in live experiments 

at the VMS lab twice annually. The Rapid Integration Test Environment (RITE) research team uses 

multiple VLAB clients at several remote locations to 

participate in the development of the RITE process. 

Currently, clients are supported at ARC, JSC, and 

Marshall Space Flight Center. VLAB client systems 

were deployed to support Space Shuttle simulations 

twice in 2002. The VLAB RITE (VLRITE) client was 

upgraded for deployment to support a RITE milestone for September 2002. A VLAB client system was 

demonstrated to the National Review Committee in 

June of 2002. 

Future Plans

Future plans for the VLAB client suite include: 

further development of real-time plotting capability; extended use of multicast network transmission; continued investigation of wireless Local Area 

Network (LAN) technologies; enhancements to 

existing display elements; and multi-platform, multiOS, PC-based client systems. The VLAB project will 

be investigating technologies that allow migration of 

the video conferencing, OTW visuals, and post-data 

reduction tools into the VLAB client interface. The 

goal is to integrate all four functional components into 

a single hardware platform controlled and operated 

from within the VLAB interface. A native Open GLbased client system is currently under development, 

as is a Linux-based server. Investigation and tests of 

state-of-the-art desktop videoconference solutions 

and an alternative for the Quickplot application are 

also in progress.

Development Team

Russell Sansom, Chuck Gregory, Rachel Wang-Yeh, 

T. Martin Pethtel, Chuck Perry, Thomas Crawford, 

Kelly Carter, Dan Wilkins, Northrop Grumman IT; 

Thomas Alderete, Steven Cowart, Julie Mikula, John 

Griffin, NASA ARC 

A typical VLAB display used by researchers.
36 Aviation Systems Division 

VMS Digital Motion Control Unit

Summary

This purpose of this project was to replace the Vertical Motion Simulator’s (VMS) analog-based Motion 

Control Unit (MCU) with a modern programmable 

digital MCU. The upgrade improved the reliability 

and maintainability of this critical system, which will 

contribute to continued cost-effective simulations for 

the aerospace community. The new MCU can also be 

easily expanded to provide additional motion control 

functions in the future. 

Introduction

The MCU provides the interface between the 

digital world of the simulation host computer and the 

analog world of the VMS motion system and operator console. It also provides signal conditioning and 

control functions to operate the VMS. The previous analog MCU system was in operation for over 

20 years. It was custom-designed and fabricated 

in-house before the availability of off-the-shelf programmable digital controllers. It functioned well, but 

future reliability and maintainability were expected 

to deteriorate due to the system’s age and a lack 

of available commercial spare parts. These factors 

provided a strong motivation for upgrading the MCU 

to a modern digital system.

Project Description 

The digital MCU consists of two main parts: the 

run-time system and a personal computer (PC) 

with software used for model development and 

monitoring. The run-time system is a VME (Versa 

Module European) system with a computer board 

and a number of data acquisition and communication boards. The MCU functions are implemented in 

software that runs on the VME computer board. The 

run-time software was developed with a commercial 

code-generator designed to implement real-time control systems using a graphical modeling technique. 

This code was downloaded into the VME computer 

board where it executes in real-time. The PC generates the run-time code and also functions as a 

display and system-troubleshooting tool. 

In addition to replacing the MCU, this project 

required a significant change to the network between 

the simulation host computer and MCU. ScramNet, 

a commercial shared memory network made by Systran, was used to link the host computer with the new 

MCU. This change simplified the overall system and 

thus will improve maintainability and reliability. 

The new MCU’s network performance and reliability was thoroughly tested off-line. Integration and 

acceptance testing was performed during a period 

between scheduled simulations. Extensive acceptance testing ensured that the new MCU functioned 

as well as--or even better than--the analog system 

in regard to safety and performance before it was 

placed into operational service.

Results

The new digital MCU was placed into service in 

January 2002 and has many advantages: it is software-programmable, easier to maintain, and easily 

extensible to include new motion control functions 

if desired in the future. Moreover, the new MCU 

replaced the functions of the old unit in a transparent 

manner to users. An additional benefit of the project 

was the integration of a ScramNet network into the 

facility that can be used to add new systems into the 

simulation network. The new digital MCU has been 

operating flawlessly since its integration into the 

VMS.

Development Team

Doug Greaves, NASA ARC; Bosco Dias, Jeff Homan, 

Emily Lewis, Martin Pethtel, Northrop Grumman 

IT; Ted Miller, Dan Beans, Jason Caulkins, E&C 

Engineering; Scott Keeling, Dave Solarsick, Allied 

Aerospace

The new digital MCU allows users to alter the software 

with a graphical interface instead of physical hardware 

circuit changes.
Aviation Systems Division 37

Polhemus Head Tracking System (PHTS) Motion Study 

Summary

Results obtained from the PHTS motion study successfully demonstrated the viability of using a magnetic head tracking system in an interchangeable cab 

(ICAB) operating in the electromechanical environment of the Vertical Motion Simulator (VMS). 

Introduction

The PHTS consists of a radio magnetic 

transmitter/receiver pair that can monitor a pilot’s 

head motion. A single transmitter module is mounted 

in the cockpit just above and slightly behind the 

pilot’s head. The receiver is mounted onto the pilot’s 

helmet. The PHTS tracks movement of the pilot’s 

head in three dimensions. 

The pilot’s head position coordinates are sent 

to the simulation host computer via a high-speed 

serial data communication link. The host computer 

utilizes position information from the PHTS to direct 

visual imagery on the pilot’s Helmet Mounted Display 

(HMD) to the correct field-of-regard indicated by the 

pilot’s head position. Image position is updated every 

simulation host frame cycle to provide smooth continuous display movement relative to changes of the 

pilot’s head position. 

The PHTS system was successfully integrated into 

a fixed base ICAB system to support the Comanche 

simulation. The Comanche research team indicated 

a desire to use the PHTS on the VMS for future 

experiments. The primary question was whether or 

not magnetic fields generated by the electromechanical systems--which drive VMS motion--would interfere with the PHTS radio magnetic signal. 

Project Description

A series of tests were developed to quantify performance of the PHTS system in fixed-base and VMS 

motion environments. A special jig was constructed 

to allow repositioning of the receiver module (on the 

helmet) in the yaw, pitch, and roll axes. Physical 

position of the receiver module was measured with 

a combination of a calibrated protractor system and 

electronic inclinometer. This data was then logged 

and compared to actual receiver position data monitored by the host computer as the cockpit was driven 

by typical motion check maneuvers. Lastly, a pilot 

was asked to fly several scenarios using the HMD 

and PHTS systems in fixed base and motion based 

operation, and then to comment on performance of 

the HMD/PHTS system. 

Initial fixed based mode baseline testing was 

conducted in the lab. The ICAB system was then 

moved onto the VMS where the baseline tests were 

repeated under both fixed base and motion-based 

operational conditions on the VMS. Piloted flight scenarios were also repeated in fixed and motion base 

operational modes on the VMS. 

Results

Real-time monitoring and post run analysis of the 

position data returned from PHTS indicate that the 

VMS motion environment does not adversely affect 

the performance of the PHTS. Consequently, the 

PHTS system can be utilized to support future HMD 

based simulation experiments on the VMS.

Development Team

Robert Morrison, Estela Hernandez, Chuck Perry, 

Martin Pethtel, Kevin Jackson, Tom Crawford, Ed 

Rogers, Dan Wilkins, Northrop Grumman IT; Steve 

Beard, Terry Turpin, Munro Deering, NASA ARC

Visual imagery was projected on the pilotsʼ HMDs.
38 Aviation Systems Division 

CVSRF Air Traffic Control Laboratory Upgrade

Summary 

The Crew Vehicle Systems Research Facility 

(CVSRF) Air Traffic Control (ATC) Laboratory has 

been upgraded with 12 Solaris-based PC systems. 

This will result in an increased number of air traffic 

controller stations while lowering maintenance and 

support costs for operations.

Introduction

The CVSRF consists of two full-motion flight 

simulators and an integrated ATC simulator. Prior to 

the upgrade, an SGI Origin 2000 server and eight 

SGI O2 workstations supported the ATC Laboratory. 

An analysis of future requirements for real-time host 

computers and development systems in the CVSRF 

showed that the systems in the Laboratory could be 

used for other applications and could be replaced by 

lower cost alternatives. After careful evaluation, the 

project selected PC-based systems running Linux 

and Solaris operating systems. 

Project Description

Phase I involved replacing the SGI server with a 

dual processor VA Linux server. This was accomplished during FY 2000 so that the SGI could be used 

to upgrade the Advanced Concepts Flight Simulator 

(ACFS) with a more powerful host computer. The VA 

Linux system was assigned the file serving tasks, 

while one of the O2s performed the High Level Architecture (HLA) gateway functions.

Phase II consisted of porting the software components of the current ATC Laboratory to the new 

PC hardware. Several applications were migrated, 

including the HLA gateway and the Pseudo-Aircraft 

Simulator (PAS) application. PAS was developed and 

continues to be supported on the Sun Solaris operating system. After evaluation, the recently released 

PC version of the Sun Solaris operating system 

was selected to support the PAS application. In this 

case, the PAS GUI worked in an identical fashion on 

both Sun workstations and PCs. The HLA gateway 

application was ported to the VA Linux server. This 

application provides the HLA gateway for PAS and 

the two flight simulator systems in the CVSRF.

The final phase of the project entailed end-to-end 

system testing and integration of the new client systems into the Laboratory. A new PAS scenario was 

developed and executed on both the SGI and PC 

platforms. Final integration testing of the new HLA 

gateway between PAS and the CVSRF flight simulators is scheduled for the first quarter of FY 03. 

Results

The ATC Laboratory has been successfully 

upgraded to 12 operational positions for air traffic 

controllers and pseudo-pilots. The SGI O2s previously used for these functions were distributed to 

developers in the CVSRF. The selection of Solaris for 

the PC client systems will reduce future development 

and porting costs for PAS, since it will continue to use 

the same operating system as before. The licensing 

and support costs of Solaris on PC platforms are also 

very attractive, especially in this application where 

there are a significant number of production systems.

Development Team 

Ronald Lehmer, Rachel Wang-Yeh, Lingmei Shao, 

T. Martin Pethtel, Conrad Grabowski, Gary Uyehara, 

James Miller, Charley Ross, Northrop Grumman IT

The ATC Laboratory at CVSRF.
Aviation Systems Division 39

ACRONYMS

A

AATT ...................................................... Advanced Air Transportation Technologies

ACFS...................................................... Advanced Concepts Flight Simulator

ACT ........................................................ Advanced Concepts Transport

AFDD...................................................... Army Aeroflightdynamics Directorate

AOL ........................................................ Airspace Operations Laboratory

ARC........................................................ Ames Research Center

ASTi........................................................ Advanced Systems Technology Incorporated

ASTOVL ................................................. Advanced Short Take Off/Vertical Landing 

ATC ........................................................ Air Traffic Control

ATG ........................................................ Acceptance Test Guide

ATM ........................................................ Air Traffic Management

ATT......................................................... Advanced Theater Transport

ATV......................................................... All-Terrain Vehicle

AvSTAR.................................................. Aviation Systems Technology Advanced Research Program

B

B747....................................................... Boeing 747

C

CDTI....................................................... Cockpit Display of Traffic Information

CFD........................................................ Computational Fluid Dynamics

CGS........................................................ Coast Guard Station 

COTS ..................................................... Commercial-Off-The-Shelf 

CTV ........................................................ Crew Transfer Vehicle

CVSRF ................................................... Crew Vehicle Systems Research Facility

D

DAG........................................................ Distributed Air-Ground

DFW ....................................................... Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport

DOT........................................................ Department of Transportation 

E

EOS........................................................ Experimenter Operator Station

F

FAA......................................................... Federal Aviation Administration

FB........................................................... Fixed-Base

FCCD ..................................................... Foothill Community College District 

FFC ........................................................ FutureFlight Central

FY........................................................... Fiscal Year

G

GEM ....................................................... Gust Extraction to Mixer 

GPC........................................................ Generalized Predictive Control

GUI......................................................... Graphical User Interface 

Continued next page...
40 Aviation Systems Division 

Continued next page...

H

HAC........................................................ Heading Alignment Cone

HDD........................................................ Head-Down Display

HIDSS .................................................... Helmet Integrated Display Sighting System

HLA......................................................... High Level Architecture

HMD ....................................................... Helmet-Mounted Display

HUD........................................................ Head-Up Display

I

ICAB....................................................... Interchangeable Cab

IFC.......................................................... Intelligent Flight Control

INFPCS .................................................. Integrated Neural Flight and Propulsion Control System

IT ............................................................ Information Technology

IVME....................................................... Integrated Vehicle Modeling Environment

J

JSC......................................................... Johnson Space Center

JSF......................................................... Joint Strike Fighter

K

KSC........................................................ Kennedy Space Center

L

LAN ........................................................ Local Area Network

LaRC ...................................................... Langley Research Center

M

MCLAW .................................................. Modern Control Laws

MCU ....................................................... Motion Control Unit

N

NASA...................................................... National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NASA ARC ............................................. NASA Ames Research Center

NASA JSC.............................................. NASA Johnson Space Center

NASA LaRC............................................ NASA Langley Research Center 

ND .......................................................... Navigation Display

NFCS...................................................... Neural Flight Control System

NGPC..................................................... Non-Adaptive Generalized Predictive Control

NTSB...................................................... National Transportation Safety Board 

O

OS .......................................................... Operating System

OTW....................................................... Out-The-Window
Aviation Systems Division 41

P

PAS ........................................................ Pseudo-Aircraft System

PC .......................................................... Personal Computer

PFD ........................................................ Primary Flight Display

PHTS...................................................... Polhemus Head Tracking System 

R

RHC........................................................ Rotational Hand Controller

RITE ....................................................... Rapid Integration Test Environment

S

SAS ........................................................ Stability Augmentation System

SDD........................................................ System Description Document 

SGI ......................................................... Silicon Graphics, Inc.

SHARP................................................... Slender Hypersonic Aerodynamic Research Probe

SimLabs ................................................. Simulation Laboratories

SLF......................................................... Shuttle Landing Facility

SMS........................................................ Surface Management System

SSTOL.................................................... Super-Short Take Off and Landing 

SSV ........................................................ Space Shuttle Vehicle

STOL ...................................................... Short Take Off and Landing 

STOVL.................................................... Short Take Off/Vertical Landing

T

TAL ......................................................... Transoceanic Abort Landing

TMA........................................................ Traffic Management Advisor

TMC........................................................ Traffic Management Coordinator

TRACON ................................................ Terminal Radar Approach Control

V

VAMS ..................................................... Virtual Airspace Modeling and Simulation

VAST ...................................................... Virtual Airspace Simulation Technology

VAST-RT................................................. Virtual Airspace Simulation Technology Real-Time

VF-RITE ................................................. Virtual Flight Rapid Integration Test Environment

VLAB ...................................................... Virtual Laboratory

VLRITE................................................... Virtual Laboratory for the Rapid Integration Test Environment

VMS........................................................ Vertical Motion Simulator

VME........................................................ Versa Module European

VTOL ...................................................... Vertical Take Off and Landing
42 Aviation Systems Division 

FutureFlight Central (FFC) Research Facility

FFC is a full-scale airport operations simulator 

that has the look and “feel” of an actual air traffic control tower. It supports cost-benefit studies; provides a stable platform from which new 

requirements can be derived; enables information sharing among multiple users; and tests 

software performance, safety, and reliability 

under realistic conditions.

FFC can be configured to support subsystems 

that may exist in some airport facilities but not in 

others. The various operational uses of FFC are 

enabled by the flexibility of its modular design 

and adherence to open systems architecture. 

Using an open architecture allows technology 

insertion during design iterations and throughout 

lifecycle upgrades. 

The FFC ATC Tower Cab has full-scale 

consoles and functionally accurate computer 

displays that replicate controller position-specific equipment. FFC’s controller positions are 

interchangeable to accommodate any air traffic 

control tower configuration.

Boeing 747-400 Simulator

This simulator represents a cockpit of one of 

the most sophisticated airplanes flying today. 

The simulator is equipped with programmable 

flight displays that can be easily modified to 

create displays aimed at enhancing flight crew 

situational awareness and thus improving systems safety. The simulator also has a fully digital 

control loading system, a six degree-of-freedom 

motion system, a digital sound and aural cues 

system, and a fully integrated autoflight system 

that provides aircraft guidance and control. It is 

also equipped with a weather radar system. The 

visual display system is a Flight Safety International VITAL VIIIi. The host computer driving the 

simulator is the IBM 6000 series of computer 

utilizing IBM’s reduced instruction set computer 

technology.

The 747-400 simulator provides all modes 

of airplane operation from cockpit preflight to 

parking and shutdown at destination. The simulator flight crew compartment is a fully detailed 

replica of a current airline cockpit. All instruments, controls, and switches operate as they 

do in the aircraft. All functional systems of the 

aircraft are simulated in accordance with aircraft 

data. To ensure simulator fidelity, the 747-400 

simulator is maintained to the highest possible 

level of certification for airplane simulators as 

established by the FAA. This ensures credibility 

of the results of research programs conducted in 

the simulator.

Appendix

Description of Simulation Facilities

A brief description of the Aviation Systems Division facilities 

follows. More detailed information can be found at our web site: 

www.simlabs.arc.nasa.gov.
Aviation Systems Division 43

Advanced Concepts Flight Simulator (ACFS)

This unique research tool simulates a generic 

commercial transport aircraft employing many 

advanced flight systems as well as features 

existing in the newest aircraft being built today. 

The ACFS generic aircraft was formulated and 

sized on the basis of projected user needs 

beyond the year 2000. Among its advanced 

flight systems, the ACFS includes touch sensitive electronic checklists, advanced graphical 

flight displays, aircraft systems schematics, a 

flight management system, and a spatialized 

aural warning and communications system. In 

addition, the ACFS utilizes side stick controllers for aircraft control in the pitch and roll axes. 

ACFS is mounted atop a six degree-of-freedom 

motion system. 

The ACFS utilizes Silicon Graphics, Inc. 

(SGI), computers for the host system as well as 

graphical flight displays. The ACFS uses visual 

generation and presentation systems that are 

the same as the 747-400 simulator’s. These 

scenes depict specific airports and their surroundings as viewed at dusk, twilight, or night 

from the cockpit. 

The Air Traffic Control (ATC) environment is 

a significant contributor to pilot workload and, 

therefore, to the performance of crews in flight. 

Full-mission simulation is greatly affected by the 

realism with which the ATC environment is modeled. From the crew’s standpoint, this environment consists of dynamically changing verbal 

or data-link messages, some addressed to or 

generated by other aircraft flying in the immediate vicinity.

The Crew Vehicle Systems Research Facility 

(CVSRF) ATC Laboratory is capable of operating in three modes: stand-alone, without participation by the rest of the facility; single-cab 

mode, with either advanced or conventional cab 

participating in the study; and dual-cab mode, 

with both cabs participating.

ATC Laboratory

Vertical Motion Simulator (VMS) Complex

The VMS is a critical national resource supporting the country’s most sophisticated aerospace Research & Development programs. 

The VMS complex offers three laboratories fully 

capable of supporting research. The dynamic 

and flexible research environment lends itself 

readily to simulation studies involving controls, 

guidance, displays, automation, handling qualities, flight deck systems, accident/incident investigations, and training. Other areas of research 

include the development of new techniques and 

technologies for simulation and the definition of 

requirements for training and research simulators.

The VMS’ large amplitude motion system is 

capable of 60 feet of vertical travel and 40 feet 

of lateral or longitudinal travel. It has six independent degrees of freedom and is capable of 

maximum performance in all axes simultaneously. Motion base operational efficiency is 

enhanced by the Interchangeable Cab (ICAB) 

system which consists of five different interchangeable cabs. These five customizable cabs 

simulate Advanced Short Take Off/Vertical Landing (ASTOVL) vehicles, helicopters, transports, 

the Space Shuttle orbiter, and other designs of 

the future. Each ICAB is customized, configured, 

and tested at a fixed-base development station 

and then either used in place for a fixed-base 

simulation or moved on to the motion platform.

Digital image generators provide full color 

daylight scenes and include six channels, 

multiple eye points, and a chase plane point of 

view. The VMS simulation lab maintains a large 

inventory of customizable visual scenes with a 

unique in-house capability to design, develop 

and modify these databases. Real-time aircraft 

status information can be displayed to both 

pilot and researcher through a wide variety of 

analog instruments, and head-up, head-down or 

helmet-mounted displays.
For additional information, please contact:

Tom Alderete

Chief, Simulation Planning Office

Aviation Systems Division

(650) 604-3271

E-mail: talderete@mail.arc.nasa.gov

or

Barry Sullivan

Chief, Aerospace Simulation Operations Branch

Aviation Systems Division

(650) 604-6756

E-mail: bsullivan@mail.arc.nasa.gov