World Aviation Training Summit 2019: Side-Stick Piloting, Head-Up Display, Angle of Attack, and Cirrus Aircraft

Earlier this month I attended WATS 2019, the World Aviation Training Summit, in Orlando, Florida. The conference has been running for over twenty years, with many repeat attendees, and the core aviation training theme has branched into sub-conferences delineated by both geography (Asia APATS, Europe EATS), and subject matter focus (Multi-Crew Pilot Licence, maintenance training: AAETS).

This was the first year I attended, on behalf of Seeing Machines and alongside Rama Myers, supporting our Crew Training System: Eye-Tracker for improved safety, piloting performance, learning effectiveness & efficiency, and competency-based training. This year's theme of Identifying and Developing Professionalism in the Global Aviation Workforce was a bit of a mouthful, but the conference tracks and presentations supported the theme in a holistic sense.

While I attended with a Seeing Machines nametag, I observed and experienced a lot as a general aviation pilot. This article reflects on some of those key learnings and observations.

Side-Stick Flying: A320

From a piloting perspective, I really enjoyed trialling Pacific Simulators' A320 Cockpit Procedures Trainer (CPT). I approached Pacific Simulators from an interested perspective in that I had not flown a side-stick aircraft before, and I wanted to try to understand and experience the difference. My interest was piqued recently, when a senior Air Force pilot remarked that side-stick controls are generally more intuitive to younger pilots, as they're more similar to gaming consoles in feel and response than traditional mechanical controls. As a quick refresher, most general aviation cockpits are laid out with the traditional direct mechanical control yokes. Airbus tend to opt for the side-stick in their commercial aircraft, reflecting their pioneering in fly-by-wire controls, while Boeing prefer the traditional control yoke. Some business jets now offer side-stick controls, such as Gulfstream's G500 and G600, as well as the Sukhoi Superjet. Many modern military fast jets, such as the F-22, F-35, F-16, and Dassault Rafale, use side-stick controls while most pre-fifth generation fighters, such as the F/A-18, use a traditional centre-mounted control column.

At the CPT, we quickly established that I also had not flown a heavy, multi-engine, or multi-crew aircraft; all characteristics of the A320. I sat down in the left-hand seat, while Rob, Pacific Simulators' Manager, sat in the right to talk me through a few things. We lined up for a takeoff from Malta's runway 13. I can't recall the exact takeoff power settings and sequencing, but it felt like a staggered process of going from idle, to just above idle, to 50%, to MAX/FLEX; always advancing both throttles together for symmetric thrust application. The takeoff roll seemed to take about as long as a Piper Archer (I'm sure it was longer in time), and I noticed the 100 knot indicator, V1 speed indicator, and Vrotate indicator.

At Vrotate, Rob instructed me to pull back on the side-stick until my flight director pitch was at 15 degrees nose up. There are few attitude cues to go by, although I'm sure proficient Airbus pilots would be able to explain them, so pitch and bank angles are set using the PFD. 15 degrees pitch felt high compared to a usual GA 10 degrees, and Rob explained that swept-wing aircraft require a higher nose-up attitude on takeoff. This is because swept wings have a reduced lift curve slope relative to straight wings, so they need greater angle of attack to generate equivalent lift / maximum lift.

I found control inputs using the sidestick very different. Partly because this was a non-motion simulator, but the fly-by-wire gave me no resistance, which made it challenging to feel my inputs. Also, the method of control is very different to direct mechanical control. A traditional yoke or control stick requires you to select-hold-trim in decreasing orders of magnitude, whereas my limited experience with the side-stick required a process more like control input-release-adjust in that I needed to 'blip and release' the side-stick rather than direct and control.

Rob cleaned up the aircraft and I flew a gentle arc to reposition for landing. Angles of bank felt easy to input as I was simply blipping the side-stick until my flight director lined up with the required bank angle. I'd then correct with some backstick to bring the nose up. Rob prompted me to try to enter a high angle of bank, which I inputted. The aircraft wouldn't go past 45 degrees, an Airbus feature known as high angle of attack protection.

Given we were quite close to the runway, I needed to crank on more bank in order to make the extended centreline. Rob cautioned me, reminding me that while that sort of handling may be OK in military or general aviation, it's a little unsettling for the 150-odd (simulated) passengers on board. We lined up for approach, Rob configured the aircraft, and I set about managing manual thrust, attempting to control my approach speed and aimpoint. I found it quite straightforward in terms of set power, check, reset power (focus on maintaining speed on the green dot), aim for the runway aimpoint... until late final when minor inputs on the sidestick felt exaggerated because of the inherent sensitivity of the stick, my being used to S-H-T inputs, and my lack of feel. We may have bounced a little, but minimally, with the jet's mass helpfully bringing us firmly back to the runway, and we auto-braked and reverse-thrusted readily.

Emergencies and Crew Resource Management: Teamwork

We then reset to 10,000 feet and 200-plus knots. The objective being that Rob was going to show me some multi-crew emergency scenarios, and the different way of managing them relative to single pilot, single engine. First was a Generator Failure. Rob pointed to the Electronic Centralised Aircraft Monitor (ECAM), indicating 'STATUS.' A few seconds later, a chime sounded and an orange warning light came on.

We tried a few different emergency scenarios, with Rob talking me through a typical Crew Resource Management (CRM) problem solving process. I felt very behind the aircraft as I tried to take in the information being presented, the role I was assigned (Pilot Flying / Captain, and the prescribed tasks associated with that role), and while trying to prioritise Aviate-Navigate-Communicate-Administrate with increasingly complex problems. For instance, while GEN FAIL was relatively straightforward in terms of the ECAM and CRM process, we also were subsequently presented with a CARGO SMOKE warning, and then an ENG FIRE warning.

I don't recall the actual resolution process for these scenarios, but the important takeaway is that regardless of the perceived severity of the issue, it is vital to take a few seconds to pause, gather information, and work the problem as an integrated crew rather than as individual problem-solvers. This way, the problem-solving process in a multi-crew environment is effective in terms of having two brains working on the issue, but appropriate task delegation and processing is important in ensuring 1+1 = >2.  

Head-Up Display

Collins Aerospace were exhibiting their M-6000 Head-up Guidance System™ (HGS) through a novel Virtual Reality experience. Having not trialled VR before, and with minimal HUD flying, this was a first for me.

The use case for HUD training through VR made perfect sense when explained by Collins' Senior Engineering Manager:

"...feedback from our partners highlighted that it takes pilots at least 250 hours to be safe and proficient at HUD usage. Commercial pilots, if their aircraft even has a HGS, typically use it below 10,000 feet for maybe fifteen minutes at a time. In a two-crew environment, using a HUD so little, it takes a long time to gain proficiency. VR helps pilots with that."

Collins' HGS is not 'just a HUD,' but was paired with an Enhanced Vision System (EVS). This capability fuses Collins' Synthetic Vision System's terrain database information with aircraft information and multispectral EVS camera images to provide real-time imagery of runway lighting, terrain, and obstacles as they appear ahead of the aircraft. To demonstrate the effectiveness of HGS, Collins presented a scenario of an approach into Juneau, Alaska.

Juneau, Alaska

Historically, "operations into the Juneau International Airport runway 08 frequently had been interrupted or delayed because of low visibility and ceilings. When the wind shifted, making operations on runway 08 difficult or impossible, the opposite runway, runway 26, was unusable because it lacked an approach landing aid and associated procedures." (Boeing Commercial Airplanes, 2000)

In 1996 Alaska Airlines pioneered Required Navigation Performance (RNP) Area Navigation (RNAV) approach and departure operations into Juneau. While RNAV and RNP are similar, being aircraft operations within coverage of station-referenced navigation aids and/or self-contained aids, the key difference between them is that RNP requires strict on-board performance monitoring, navigation containment, and alerting. RNAV RNP is thus a technology that improves navigation containment, increasing efficiency through improved routing, reduced path length, lower minima, and more stabilised approaches (Boeing Commercial Airplanes, 2005). With Juneau's runway 08 frequently affected by weather, and runway 26's approach weaving its way through a mountain valley, developing a new procedure using Earth-referenced waypoints and boundaries provided increased operational flexibility and capability.

Importantly, these specific Juneau RNP RNAV departure and approach procedures are only available to Alaska Airlines. This is due to the on-board requirements for safe RNAV Required Navigation Performance, as well as the additional training Alaska Airlines' aircrew undertake. Speaking with representatives from Alaska Airlines at WATS, they are understandably proud to have pioneered innovation and safety, for the benefit of the industry generally, in demonstrating the benefits of these proprietary RNP RNAV procedures.

Head-up Guidance System

These difficulty factors are what made Collins' HGS demonstration of an approach into Juneau so interesting. Through a simulated circling approach towards runway 26, Collins Aerospace highlighted the benefits of HGS in progressive stages:

1. Natural eye / vision. In CAVOK conditions, flying the approach into Juneau is straightforward, as was demonstrated. But nighttime, and low-visibility weather conditions quickly become a threat due to the surrounding terrain.
2. HUD/HGS. Turning on the HUD provides symbology that aids in the approach, without needing to look inside the cockpit.
3. Plus EVS. With the Enhanced Vision System coupled with the HUD, visibility conditions scarcely matter. The runway, obstacles, surrounding terrain, and airport environment are clearly displayed and apparent.

Collins Aerospace's VR-HGS was extremely effective in highlighting the value of enhanced vision systems, head-up guidance systems, and the problems they can solve; as well as the reliance they can manifest. Being unfamiliar with the HUD symbology, I now understand the need (and difficulty) using it regularly and in training in order to be to be comfortable and proficient, allowing the pilot to focus on the important task of flying and/or monitoring the flight phase.

Angle of Attack

Representatives from Gulf Air presented a primer on Angle of Attack (AoA) piloting; what AoA is, why it is important, and what AoA is not. Given recent news and accidents involving Angle of Attack, a refresher of this was useful from a first-principles understanding, as well as informing delegates of the importance of understanding AoA from a piloting perspective.

To aircrew, AoA is (normally) the angle between the flight path vector and the horizon, also known as the climb (or descent) angle (Boeing Commercial Airplanes, 2000). Put even simpler, AoA is the angle that the airflow/wind is hitting the wing. Technically, AoA is the angle between wing chord line (reference on the aircraft) and relative airflow (oncoming air). Increasing the angle of attack increases both lift and drag, up to a point called the critical angle of attack. This critical AoA is the angle at which an aircraft will always stall, regardless of weight, bank angle, temperature, density altitude, and CoG.  

I have not piloted with direct reference to AoA before, but I have noticed it regularly comes up in conversations with airline pilots, and fast jet pilots (who tend to refer to AoA as Alpha α). These two piloting groups are interested in Alpha because of its relationship with lift.

For air transport pilots, AoA determines whether the aircraft's aerodynamic surfaces are stalled or not. Importantly, an aircraft wing can stall at any airspeed and at any attitude, because fundamentally, "if the AoA is greater than the stall angle, the surface will stall (ICAO, 2017)." Counterintuitively, an aircraft won't just stall at high pitch and low airspeed, but will stall past critical angle of attack, which may be at any attitude and airspeed.

For fighter pilots, Alpha is crucial to winning close air-to-air combat engagement in manoeuvring to an advantageous position in order to deploy weapons: high-performance AoA flying means the wing and aircraft are optimally turning and performing; but fly past the critical AoA and the wing stalls, stops performing, and the aircraft becomes an easy target.

Cirrus Aircraft

I look forward to one day flying (owning?) a Cirrus Aircraft. As a relatively modern aircraft manufacturer, Cirrus are well regarded for their innovative and progressive approach to general aviation aircraft. I spent some time at their booth at WATS, talking through the safety and performance features, and experiencing the flight management system and integrated Garmin primary flight display. While I could write a whole article on Cirrus, I've highlighted some key points from WATS below (more specific to Cirrus' general aviation lineup, not their Vision jet). These points do not do justice to Cirrus' full feature set and value-adds that they offer the general aviation industry, but they are a brief overview of some of them.

Cirrus Airframe Parachute System

The Cirrus Airframe Parachute System (CAPS®) probably speaks the strongest to Cirrus' fundamental philosophy of creating "safer airplanes, safer pilots and safer skies." CAPS is a ballistic parachute that can be deployed from the back of the aircraft in an emergency; a feature that no other certified general aviation manufacturer provides as standard equipment.

My last flight in a PC-9/A equipped with a Martin Baker ejection seat was in 2008. Although I didn't fully appreciate it at the time, the bang seat gave a wonderful sense of security. I knew that if anything went wrong with the aircraft, if I couldn't safely land, even if I suffered a mid-air collision; that I had a yellow and black handle that would probably save my life. Since 2008, I've only flown in aircraft without ejection seats. I start each flight with a missing peace of mind that Martin Baker provided, knowing that there is one critical safety item I wish I still had. Cirrus have figured out a way to provide that.

Like any safety critical system, training is important in order to effectively employ it during an emergency. Cirrus offer reference materials, training courses, and help prioritise a safety-first mindset to ensure CAPS deployment is a trained and natural behaviour in a life threatening situation such as loss of control, pilot incapacitation, mid-air collision, structural failure, and unfavourable engine failures. While there are over 142 people alive today because the pilot deployed CAPS, there have been over 100 serious injuries and fatalities that resulted from the pilot's indecision, lack of decision, or loss of situational awareness in deploying CAPS.

Avionics

Cirrus' avionics suite, named Cirrus Perspective by Garmin, is much more than a product, but more a comprehensive and holistic experience. "Designed around the pilot rather than the airframe," Cirrus Perspective's integrated avionics deliver utility in an intuitive and connected manner. While difficult to even summarise the multitude of features, Cirrus Perspective is designed to make piloting easier, deliver safety functionality, and make general aviation more comfortable.

To "bring the outside in" is a phrase that Cirrus use to describe the value that Perspective delivers in addition to a standard Garmin avionics suite. An Enhanced Vision System through large two 12-inch MFD screens, flight planning integrated with Garmin Pilot, intuitive & simple autopilot controls, 'go-around' button on the throttle, environmental system controls,

Autolevel & Safety

While CAPS may be the more obvious and well known Cirrus safety feature, there are plenty of other active and passive ones. NASA-developed cuffed wings to reduce spin potential, known icing protection, seatbelts with airbags, Electronic Stability Protection (ESP), a roll cage, and composite construction are some of them My favourite, though, is Cirrus' magic blue button: Autolevel.

The little blue button, labelled LVL and centrally and clearly located on the centre stack, engages the autopilot to return the aircraft to straight-and-level. This fantastic safety feature can be applied in all manner of situation from inadvertent flight into IMC, to pilot incapacitation, spatial disorientation, to just giving the pilot in command time to assess, plan, and think.

WATS 2020

WATS 2019 opened with a keynote presentation by the Acting Administrator at the Federal Aviation Administration, Dan Elwell. His opening comments were “in the hands of a well-trained pilot, automation is a tool, not a crutch.” The key focus being on professional training for human pilots.

The 23rd World Airline Training Summit will again be held in Orlando in April 2020. While the content and tracks are informative; the real value in WATS lies in the deep flight training knowledge and experience held by delegates, and the innovative and progressive exhibition booths on display that support this commitment to training.

#WATS2019 #aviation #piloting #aviationtraining