OPERATIONAL SUITABILITY EVALUATIONS Presented to WeatherintheCockpit Workshop By

OPERATIONAL SUITABILITY EVALUATIONS Presented to: Weather-in-the-Cockpit Workshop By: Robert Ruiz, AFS-430 Date: August 9, 2006 Federal Aviation Administration

Introduction • • • Background Activities Objectives Study Approach Evaluation Operational Suitability Evaluation August 9, 2006 Federal Aviation Administration 2 2

Background • WX Products emerge from research as technically sound products – Good Science • Operational implementation (AFS definition) historically not part of the R&D effort • Lack of operational suitability evaluation on newly developed graphical products • Some products issued as supplementary with restrictions • CIP/FIP 2005 Hazard analysis highlighted safety issues and the need for a structured Safety Assessment of WX products Operational Suitability Evaluation August 9, 2006 Federal Aviation Administration 3 3

FY-06 Implementation Activities • AFS-400 able to secure funding to develop and implement an operational suitability evaluation • FAA Tech Center Weather Sensors Group was selected to conduct the evaluation Operational Suitability Evaluation August 9, 2006 Federal Aviation Administration 4 4

Definitions – HBAT 05 -01 and AIM • Primary Weather Product. – An aviation weather product that meets all the regulatory requirements and safety needs for use in making flight-related, aviation weather decisions. • Supplementary Weather Product. – An aviation weather product that may be used for enhanced situational awareness. If used, a supplementary weather product must only be used in conjunction with one or more primary weather products. In addition, the FAA may further restrict the use of supplementary weather products through limitations described in the product label to conduct the evaluation Operational Suitability Evaluation August 9, 2006 Federal Aviation Administration 5 5

Objectives – Operational Suitability Evaluation • Determine pilot understanding/intuitiveness of the product • Determine that the information presented is not hazardous misleading information • Determine the level of safety of the product; provide an equivalent level of safety (Supplementary-Situational Awareness) • Determine the level of training required for product use • Determine if any training and guidance materials will be needed • Provide a roadmap for AVS to move the product from Supplementary to Primary Operational Suitability Evaluation August 9, 2006 Federal Aviation Administration 6 6

Study Outline • Study 1: Supplementary Weather Product – Assess CIP operational suitability for pilot use as Supplementary Product with no restrictions – Assess operational suitability using: • • Situational Awareness CIP Supplementary Weather Product Questionnaire Interview questions Observer ratings • Study 2: Primary Weather Product – Identify CIP operational suitability issues for pilot use as Primary Product – Identify issues using: • • Situational Awareness CIP Primary Weather Product Questionnaire Interview questions Observer ratings Operational Suitability Evaluation August 9, 2006 Federal Aviation Administration 7 7

Overview • Evaluate CIP Severity and Probability products • Evaluate from pilot perspective • Use in flight planning scenarios – Preflight – In-flight* *Note: While “In-Flight” use is being examined, the evaluation will not yield data appropriate for cockpit use. Operational Suitability Evaluation August 9, 2006 Federal Aviation Administration 8 8

Approach • Simulate route planning with focus on in-flight icing – Preflight – In-flight • Active pilot participants (n=32/48) – General Aviation (Expert and Novice) – Business Jet – Regional Airline Operational Suitability Evaluation August 9, 2006 Federal Aviation Administration 9 9

Approach • Flight Planning Scenarios – – – Archived weather examined to determine flight routes Flight routes developed so that icing is encountered Eight GA Routes Four FAR Part 121 (Sky. West) Routes Flight route information includes: • • • Departure, Destination, Waypoints ETD ETE Preferred Flight Level Distance Equipage Operational Suitability Evaluation August 9, 2006 Federal Aviation Administration 10 10

Evaluation Conduct • Experimental Conditions – Study 1: CIP Supplementary Weather Product • AIRMET/SIGMETs (No CIP) • AIRMET/SIGMETs (With CIP) – Study 2: CIP Primary Weather Product • CIP (No AIRMET/SIGMETs) • CIP (With AIRMET/SIGMETs) Operational Suitability Evaluation August 9, 2006 Federal Aviation Administration 11 11

Evaluation Conduct • Experimental Conditions – Pilots • Expert • Novice – Equipage • De/anti-icing equipment • No de/anti-icing equipment – Icing Severity • Trace/Light • Moderate or Greater (MOGR) Operational Suitability Evaluation August 9, 2006 Federal Aviation Administration 12 12

Evaluation Conduct • Pretest Briefing – Objectives of evaluation – Training • CIP information and use • Evaluation platform • Evaluation data collection tools Operational Suitability Evaluation August 9, 2006 Federal Aviation Administration 13 13

Evaluation Conduct • Preflight – Assigned preferred route • Trace/Light Icing • Moderate or Greater (MOGR) – Standard weather briefing – Depending on experimental condition, provide icing products for Supplementary Study or Primary Study – Pilot decides route/altitude adjustments/no adjustments – Interview questions – Assess Situational Awareness • Pilot • CFI Operational Suitability Evaluation August 9, 2006 Federal Aviation Administration 14 14

Evaluation Conduct • In-flight – Assigned preferred route • Trace/Light Icing • Moderate or Greater (MOGR) – – Perform preflight self brief Pilot is asked to imagine he/she is about 90 minutes into flight In-flight weather update provided Depending on experimental condition, provide icing products for Supplementary Study or Primary Study – Pilot decides route/altitude adjustment/no adjustment – Interview questions – Assess Situation Awareness • Pilot • CFI Operational Suitability Evaluation August 9, 2006 Federal Aviation Administration 15 15

Data Elements • Situation Awareness (SA) rating – Pilot – Observer (CFI) • • Operational suitability questionnaire responses Interview comments Potential pilot errors/poor decisions General observations Operational Suitability Evaluation August 9, 2006 Federal Aviation Administration 16 16

Evaluation Criteria: Supplementary • Statistically significant increase in SA when CIP is used with AIRMETs/SIGMETs Evaluation Criteria: Primary • No decline in SA when CIP is used without AIRMET/SIGMETs Operational Suitability Evaluation August 9, 2006 Federal Aviation Administration 17 17

Evaluation Results (Expected) • Supplementary Weather Product Evaluation – Operational suitability confirmation data • Data to support or not support CIP use as supplementary product without restrictions • Primary Weather Product Evaluation – Identify operational suitability issues • Issues to be resolved in transitioning CIP to Primary Product • • Interview responses Pilot Error Situation Awareness Operational Suitability Comments Operational Suitability Evaluation August 9, 2006 Federal Aviation Administration 18 18

Evaluation Timeline • Data collection (7/21 – 9/05) • Evaluation Reports – Quick Look (9/25/2006); NBAA/FPAW – Final Report (11/03/2006) • CIP-Severity and Probability Operational Dec 06. Operational Suitability Evaluation August 9, 2006 Federal Aviation Administration 19 19

Acknowledgement • FAA Tech Center Weather Sensors Group in providing assistance in developing some of the slides that were used in the presentation Contact Information Robert M. Ruiz AFS-430 202 -385 -4578 Robert. Ruiz@faa. gov Operational Suitability Evaluation August 9, 2006 Federal Aviation Administration 20 20