Thinking Ahead: "Pilotless" UAVs
The AF and in particular the CIA have had high loss rates with UAV operations with or with out an enemy air defense system involved. UAV flight ops are basically for the "pilot" a simulator ride, a whole lot of seat the pants, sound, feel for the air frame as it is stressed, smell (is something burning?), and other intangables are missing, making for greatly reduced flight situational awareness, resulting in, surprise...high Class 1 losses. The perception by executive dept civilian higher ups that UAVs are "disposable" doesn't help matters. Flying a UAV on a real mission requires more pilot realtime feedback that what is now fielded. After all, powered air flight in complex 4D combat environments is not the same thing as World of Warcraft.
As a former IHO/human factors officer with the 2d MAW (think AV-8s) I do have some recommendations to cut the UAV loss rate:
1. Build at least one of every model type of UAV that can carry at least several hundred pounds with a...gasp....cockpit, so its "pilots" actually "know it" what it feels like flight dynamic wise, to do ACM, landing in the dark in whether;
2. And... yes use ....gasp...real combat experenced pilots to operate it (not software engineers).
3. The flight cockpit for the UAV needs to be a real cockpit in a real 4D field physical simulator;
4. Microphones placed 360x360 in the UAV should used to present the "pilot: a real,dynamic accustic freespace to "float" in;
5. Continuous dynamic computer generated 360x360 free visual field from the UAV projected around the cockpit of the UAV pilot...capable of answering questions like...is the vertical control surface still attached..
6. Use real physics data feedback in the HOTAS to provide a "real hands on touch".
7. Also, use a crew, not a single operator, for parts of the flight that demand high pilot workloads, to ensure situational awareness...
The technology {thanks to computer gamers) for this is getting better and cheaper every day, and the best operators environment in the air OR on the ground is a lot cheaper than mission screwup, loss of mission, and/or airframe.
You can take the pilot out of the AC cockpit, but the AC operator still has the same human factor awareness needs to survive. The UAV and operator have to function as a unitary thing to be effective, money invested to that end has a hundredfold return…
As a former IHO/human factors officer with the 2d MAW (think AV-8s) I do have some recommendations to cut the UAV loss rate:
1. Build at least one of every model type of UAV that can carry at least several hundred pounds with a...gasp....cockpit, so its "pilots" actually "know it" what it feels like flight dynamic wise, to do ACM, landing in the dark in whether;
2. And... yes use ....gasp...real combat experenced pilots to operate it (not software engineers).
3. The flight cockpit for the UAV needs to be a real cockpit in a real 4D field physical simulator;
4. Microphones placed 360x360 in the UAV should used to present the "pilot: a real,dynamic accustic freespace to "float" in;
5. Continuous dynamic computer generated 360x360 free visual field from the UAV projected around the cockpit of the UAV pilot...capable of answering questions like...is the vertical control surface still attached..
6. Use real physics data feedback in the HOTAS to provide a "real hands on touch".
7. Also, use a crew, not a single operator, for parts of the flight that demand high pilot workloads, to ensure situational awareness...
The technology {thanks to computer gamers) for this is getting better and cheaper every day, and the best operators environment in the air OR on the ground is a lot cheaper than mission screwup, loss of mission, and/or airframe.
You can take the pilot out of the AC cockpit, but the AC operator still has the same human factor awareness needs to survive. The UAV and operator have to function as a unitary thing to be effective, money invested to that end has a hundredfold return…