Article: 1420 of sci.aeronautics Path: newshost.ncd.com!ncd.com!olivea!koriel!cs.utexas.edu!not-for-mail From: rdd@netcom.com (Robert Dorsett) Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics Subject: FAQ on PILOT Date: 21 Jun 1994 11:01:29 -0500 Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway Lines: 191 Sender: nobody@cs.utexas.edu Approved: aeronautics@rascal.ics.utexas.edu Message-ID: <9406211600.AA05770@ferhino.dfrf.nasa.gov> NNTP-Posting-Host: news.cs.utexas.edu Following a lead from James A. Squires on rec.av.simulators, I found the following on kaiwan.com. It may be of interest to this group. I know nothing about this program. Just found it interesting. -- Robert Dorsett rdd@netcom.com ------------------------------------ cut here -------------------------------- : : : Here is a list of some of the various questions I have received and their : answers in no particular order. If it doesn't answer your specific : questions, feel free to drop me an email. : : William T. Overton : overton@l14h13.jsc.nasa.gov : (713) 333-7705 : : ================================== : *Some Frequently Asked Questions:* : ================================== : : *What is PILOT? : Put simply, the Portable In-flight Landing Operations Trainer (PILOT) is a : portable computer with a very high fidelity shuttle flight model, high : resolution graphics, and it's own Rotational Hand Controller (RHC) used on : orbit by the shuttle Commander (CDR) and pilot (PLT) to maintain landing : skills during shuttle flights. Put more technically, PILOT is a : self-contained tool consisting of a portable SPARC II compatible computer : with a 15" High-Resolution color flat panel, interfaced with a dedicated : Rotational Hand Controller (RHC) and running the following software: A : modified SunO/S 4.1.1 UNIX, a rehosted version of NASA's Shuttle : Engineering Simulator (SES), and graphics with pilot selectable : out-the-window with Heads Up Display (HUD) or a partial instrument panel : (Graphics based on a Kinetic Visuals product called VisionForm). : : *What is PILOT's purpose? : PILOT is a Detailed Test Objective (DTO #667), and will be tested on : shuttle flights STS-58, 61, 62, 63, 65, and 67. After those flights, PILOT : will probably become a standard item on future shuttle flights. PILOT's : written objectives are the following: The purpose of this DTO is to verify : that the PILOT simulator will assist the CDR and PLT in maintaining the : highest possible level of proficiency for the end of mission approach and : landing task on extended duration orbiter flights through the use of an : on-orbit trainer/simulator which strongly reinforces visual cues over the : temporal, proprioceptive, and otolithic cues. This on-orbit : trainer/simulator will also give the CDR and PLT a tool to combat the : degradation of motor skills in the landing task while demonstrating the : ability of current technology to provide a useful, portable in-flight : landing simulator. : : *Are the actual computer displays used?: : The orbiter CRT's are not used, but a partial SPEC 50 is provided on : PILOT's instrument panel along with a simulated Attitude Directional : Indicator (ADI), and a Horizontal Situation Indicator (HSI). : : *What if the CDR crashes during the sim?: : I guess he would be embarrassed, but it won't have any impact on anything : (except perhaps the confidence of his/her fellow crew members :) : : *Are any graphics used to simulate the window views?: : Yes. The out-the-window with HUD view duplicates the same field of view : offered to the CDR's design eye. During use, the PILOT computer is placed : directly in front of the PLT side HUD, and the PILOT RHC strapped to the : orbiter RHC. This allows users to sit in the PLT's chair and fly PILOT : very much the same way the CDR or PLT would fly the orbiter (in terms of : view and control placement) This, of course, doesn't apply to using : PILOT's simulated instrument panel. : : *Is it based on a NASA certified space shuttle simulator?: : Yes. It is a nearly unmodified version of the SES. The SES, located at : the Johnson Space Center in Houston, is the primary shuttle simulation used : to evaluate engineering issues, especially related to the flight control : system. The only changes made for PILOT were changes necessary due to : moving the SES code from it's Cyber 962 main frame host, to a UNIX : workstation, and for additional capabilities specifically needed for PILOT. : PILOT and the SES are still intimately coupled, and therefore, PILOT will : benefit from all future SES upgrades with little or no additional effort : : *Who wrote the simulation?: : The SES has many authors. It was originally developed from an Apollo sim! : But...I assume you mean for PILOT. Well, I did the vast majority of the : simulation support (rehosting etc.) but was assisted by Bob Reitz and Huyen : Diep. We all work for Lockheed Engineering and Sciences Company and : support NASA EG2. Our job is SES support (PILOT was a welcome bonus! :) : Jim Squires and Cleon Jones of Kinetic Visuals ported their off-the-shelf : product VisionForm to our machine for graphics support, and supplied the : first versions of the Edwards AFB landing scenes. Al Strahan of NASA wrote : the crew interface, including some excellent data displays that mimic the : Shuttle Training Aircraft data displays (thus the astronauts are familiar : with the format). Several other people had contributions including : Mcfarlane's ADI and Swaim's HSI, both rehosted from other applications. : The RHC guys, Johnson, Brock, Chen, and Fwu. And we never could have done : it with out Dave Jossi taking care of all that political stuff that : engineers tend to forget. Charlie Justiz and Major General Joe Engle are : the co-principle investigators and tell the rest of us what to do. :) Joe : is largely responsible for getting this whole thing pushed through from : concept to commitment. Bob Hinson served as Chief, keepping it all going! : : THAT will teach you to ask who. To anyone I over looked, I am genuinely : sorry. One thing that we are most proud of is that this all went from : concept to on-board ready to launch in well under a year! It was used : on-orbit 10 months after someone asked me "What if...?" : : *What do the astronauts think of it?: : As far as I know, they love it. Many astronauts were consulted during the : entire development of PILOT and we took their comments very seriously and : tried to tailor it (interfaces, capabilities, etc.) to their requirements. : : *Can it simulate micro bursts?: : It doesn't, but it easily could. Currently we give the user several : pre-defined wind profiles to chose from or, they can define their own wind : via the menus. Some of the user options include: Mass Properties (x,y,z : cg and Mass), initialization location (Mach=.95, 30 degrees prior to final, : 10k, 3.5k), left or right HAC, winds mentioned above and more. We tried to : give enough capability to be flexible, but not so much it became too : cumbersome to operate. Just as a side note, the flight rules prevent : shuttle landings in micro burst conditions. : : *What phases of the landing does it cover?: : For PILOT we chose to start the simulation at Mach = 0.95 or below. The : only reason being because that's where the CDR typically takes over. PILOT : can be easily adapted to fly from as early as Major Mode 304 (in fact I : flew from Entry Interface to wheel stop one day). : : *How often is it run during a mission?: : Depends. Currently it varies. One of the objectives of the DTO is to : determine what usage patterns will be best. Should they fly every day, or : just the last day, or something in between? When it flew on STS-58 : (PILOT's first flight) it was flown by the CDR and PLT on flight days 5 and : 12(?). On STS-61, the CDR and PLT only had time to fly on flight day : 11(?). As busy as 61 was, we were lucky to get manifested. : : So far, the crew seems to have decided that the best way to use PILOT is as : a team. On STS-58, the CDR, PLT, and MS2 all worked together during the : simulated landing. With the CDR flying, the PLT and MS2 made their calls : just as they would during the landing. : : *Does PILOT take into account differences in specific orbiters? : No. But it easily could. It is true that there are small differences in : the aerodynamic characteristics between the different shuttle vehicles. : These differences are primarily used for engineering analysis, and are : therefore available in PILOT (since PILOT comes from the SES). The reason : they aren't used normally is because the orbiter's sophisticated flight : control system makes them pretty much unnoticeable. i.e.., if the stick is : centered, a zero rate command is sent to the flight control. It then moves : the surfaces to the correct positions to achieve this command. Thus, the : only "real" difference when using the vehicle specific aero is different : aerodynamic trim surface positions. : : *Does PILOT use a targeted weight and CG? : Yes. Before each mission, a default weight/CG is defined. These are best : guesses of what the day of landing conditions will be. In addition to : this, we have also faxed conditions to the crew concerning weight/cg and : current or projected wind conditions that they can then load and use in : PILOT. This might eventually be done via an electronic transfer, but for : now it is strictly manual. : : *Does PILOT display landing performance numbers after wheels stop? : Yes and no. (my catch phrase :) Yes we display *many* performance : parameters, but no we don't run to wheels stop. It easily could, but since : PILOT doesn't have rudder pedals (just the RHC), we decided to stop the : simulation at nose gear touch down. As far as the data goes... Upon nose : gear touch down, the PILOT's pilot is shown 5 plots displaying altitude and : altitude rate, RHC inputs, and lateral runway placement. After the plots, : we display about 27 specific parameters such as altitude over the : threshold, touch down velocity and position, glide slope deviations, decent : rates etc.etc.etc. These parameters are displayed in the same format for : PILOT that they are for the Shuttle Training Aircraft so that the pilot can : find the information more easily. : : *Is PILOT available to the public? : The short answer is, no. Why? Well...the first and most obvious reason is : because PILOT is specifically tailored to run on our high power UNIX : workstation (40mhz SPARC II compatible, 32M RAM, 20M disk space for PILOT) : that doesn't happen to be available for general sale here in the states. : Another is because NASA doesn't own the rights to the proprietary graphics : software. My understanding is that individuals can request the NASA owned : code for whatever by going through some process (don't ask me). I suppose : then that the user could provide his own graphics, or buy/lease the : existing from Kinetic Visuals (KV). The KV software is Silicon Graphics : (SG) based, and therefore a port of PILOT to an SG would be the easiest. : : :