MÉTODO E SISTEMA PARA UMA ANÁLISE AUTOMATIZADA DE POUSO DE AERONAVE

Abstract

A method and system for an automated aircraft landing analysis includes: receiving one or more aircraft landing performance parameters for one or more landing phases; determining a landing performance deviation for each of the one or more landing phases in response to one or more aircraft landing performance parameters; identifying at least one system failure, one fault, and one pilot error that could have led to deviations in landing performance for each of the one or more landing phases; developing a fault tree for the deviations in landing performance for each of the one or more landing phases; identifying the measurable parameters, calculable parameters, inferable parameters, or observable parameters in the fault tree; converting the fault tree into a high-level reasoning model using a standard inference methodology; performing a root cause analysis;Identify the root cause of the deviation in landing performance; and display the root cause of the deviation in landing performance.

Description

METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR AN AUTOMATED AIRCRAFT LANDING ANALYSIS CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED REQUESTS

[001] This application claims the benefit of the Provisional Application. Indian No. 201911030958 submitted on July 31, 2019, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety. FUNDAMENTALS

[002] The subject matter disclosed here generally refers to aircraft analysis tools and, more specifically, to an automated aircraft landing performance analysis.

[003] Aircraft landing performance analysis includes the analysis of hard landings and runway overruns. Hard landings are irregular and uncontrolled landings, which can result from performing landings with a vertical speed greater than normal. Runway overruns occur when the aircraft exceeds the length of a specific runway during landing. Hard landings and runway overruns are directly related to aircraft landing performance, and regular assessment of landing performance is necessary to prevent accidents and / or incidents. BRIEF SUMMARY

[004] According to one embodiment, a method is provided for an automated aircraft landing analysis. The method includes: receiving one or more aircraft landing performance parameters for one or more landing phases; determining a landing performance deviation for each of the one or more landing phases in response to one or more aircraft landing performance parameters; identifying at least one system fault, one failure, and one pilot error that could have led to deviations in landing performance for each of the one or more landing phases; developing a fault tree for the deviations in landing performance. Petition 870250062037, dated 07 / 18 / 2025, page 10 / 77 / 19 landing for each of the one or more landing phases; identify the measurable parameters, calculable parameters, inferable parameters, or observable parameters in the fault tree; convert the fault tree into a high-level reasoning model using a standard inference methodology; perform a root cause analysis, feeding the measurable and calculable parameters as inputs into the high-level reasoning model; identify a root cause of the deviation in landing performance in response to the root cause analysis; and display the root cause of the deviation in landing performance.

[005] In addition to one or more of the features described above, or as an alternative, other embodiments may include that one or more landing phases include at least one of an approach phase, a flare phase, a landing phase and a ground roll phase after landing.

[006] In addition to one or more of the features described above, or as an alternative, other modalities may include: determining a recommended maintenance action in response to root cause analysis; and displaying the recommended maintenance action.

[007] In addition to one or more of the features described above, or as an alternative, other features may include: displaying a hyperlink to the specific section of a digital maintenance manual that provides a detailed description of the recommended maintenance actions.

[008] In addition to one or more of the features described above, or as an alternative, other options may include: displaying the fault tree.

[009] In addition to one or more of the features described above, or as an alternative, other features may include: displaying aircraft systems associated with landing systems; and highlighting an aircraft system that includes the root cause of the deviation in landing performance. Petition 870250062037, dated 07 / 18 / 2025, page 11 / 77 / 19

[0010] In addition to one or more of the characteristics described above, or alternatively, other embodiments may include that the deviation in landing performance is based on a deviation of one or more aircraft landing performance parameters from at least one of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulatory requirements, an estimate of in-flight landing parameters, or historical average performance.

[0011] In addition to one or more of the features described above, or as an alternative, other modalities may include: displaying aircraft systems associated with landing systems in a first zone of the graphical user interface; highlighting an aircraft system that includes the root cause of the deviation in landing performance; displaying the fault tree in a second zone of the graphical user interface; determining a recommended maintenance action in response to the root cause analysis; and displaying the recommended maintenance action in a fourth zone of the graphical user interface, where the root cause of the deviation in landing performance is displayed in a third zone of the graphical user interface.

[0012] In addition to one or more of the features described above, or as an alternative, other modalities may include that automated landing analysis is performed independently of a reported incident to provide feedback to optimize aircraft landing performance.

[0013] According to another embodiment, a system is provided. The system including: a processor; and a memory including computer executable instructions which, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to perform the operations for an automatic landing analysis, the operations including: receiving one or more aircraft landing performance parameters for one or more landing phases; determining a deviation in landing performance for each of the one or more landing phases in response to one or more performance parameters of Petition 870250062037, dated 07 / 18 / 2025, page 12 / 77 / 19 aircraft landing; identify at least one system failure, one failure, and one pilot error that could have led to deviations in landing performance for each of the one or more landing phases; develop a fault tree for the deviations in landing performance for each of the one or more landing phases; identify the measurable parameters, calculable parameters, inferable parameters, or observable parameters in the fault tree; convert the fault tree into a high-level reasoning model using a standard inference methodology; perform a root cause analysis, feed the measurable and calculable parameters as inputs into the high-level reasoning model; identify a root cause of the deviation in landing performance in response to the root cause analysis; and display the root cause of the deviation in landing performance.

[0014] In addition to one or more of the characteristics described above, or as an alternative, other embodiments may include that one or more landing phases include at least one of an approach phase, a flare phase, a landing phase and a ground roll phase after landing.

[0015] In addition to one or more of the characteristics described above, or as an alternative, additional features may include that the operations also include: determining a recommended maintenance action in response to root cause analysis; and displaying the recommended maintenance action.

[0016] In addition to one or more of the features described above, or as an alternative, other features may include that the operations also include: displaying a hyperlink to the specific section of a digital maintenance manual that provides a detailed description of the recommended maintenance actions.

[0017] In addition to one or more of the characteristics described above, or alternatively, other modalities may include that the Petition 870250062037, dated 07 / 18 / 2025, page 13 / 77 / 19 operations also include: displaying the fault tree.

[0018] In addition to one or more of the characteristics described above, or as an alternative, other modalities may include that the operations also include: displaying aircraft systems associated with landing systems; and highlighting an aircraft system that includes the root cause of the deviation in landing performance.

[0019] In addition to one or more of the characteristics described above, or alternatively, other embodiments may include that the deviation in landing performance is based on a deviation of one or more aircraft landing performance parameters from at least one of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulatory requirements, an estimate of in-flight landing parameters, or historical average performance.

[0020] In addition to one or more of the features described above, or alternatively, other modalities may include that the operations also include: displaying aircraft systems associated with landing systems in a first zone of the graphical user interface; highlighting an aircraft system that includes the root cause of the deviation in landing performance; displaying the fault tree in a second zone of the graphical user interface; determining a recommended maintenance action in response to the root cause analysis; and displaying the recommended maintenance action in a fourth zone of the graphical user interface, where the root cause of the deviation in landing performance is displayed in a third zone of the graphical user interface.

[0021] In addition to one or more of the features described above, or as an alternative, other modalities may include that operations for automated landing analysis are performed independently of a reported incident to provide feedback to optimize aircraft landing performance.

[0022] The previous characteristics and elements can be Petition 870250062037, dated 07 / 18 / 2025, page 14 / 77 / 19 combined in various combinations without exclusivity, unless expressly indicated otherwise. These resources and elements, as well as their operation, will become more evident in light of the description and figures attached below. It should be understood, however, that the description and figures below are intended to be illustrative and explanatory in nature, and not limiting. BRIEF DESCRIPTION

[0023] The following descriptions should not be considered limiting under any circumstances. With reference to the attached drawings, similar elements are numbered similarly: FIG. 1 represents a block diagram for automated aircraft landing analysis, according to one or more embodiments of this disclosure; FIG. 2 represents a flowchart for automated aircraft landing analysis, according to one or more embodiments of this disclosure; FIG. 3 represents a fault tree for automated aircraft landing analysis, according to one or more embodiments of this disclosure; FIG. 4 represents a section of the fault tree of FIG. 3 for automated aircraft landing analysis, according to one or more embodiments of the present disclosure; FIG. 5 represents a table for automated aircraft landing analysis, according to one or more modalities of this disclosure; and FIG. 6 represents a graphical user interface for automated aircraft landing analysis, according to one or more embodiments of this disclosure. DETAILED DESCRIPTION Petition 870250062037, dated 07 / 18 / 2025, page 15 / 77 / 19

[0024] A detailed description of one or more embodiments of the apparatus and method disclosed is presented herein by way of example and not limitation, with reference to the Figures.

[0025] In the current environment, aircraft landing performance analysis is conducted by airlines after landing. Performance analysis includes the pilot providing personal observations on landing. In addition, airlines may initiate a detailed analysis and take necessary corrective actions if they so desire. Traditionally, analysis is only conducted in cases of major incidents or deviations from regulatory standards. Regulatory standards may be provided by guidelines from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

[0026] In landing events where there are no reports of major incidents, deviations in pilot performance and aircraft systems may still exist. Furthermore, observations and records provided by the pilot are prone to human error, limitations in verbal communication, and subjective opinions that can lead to inconsistent feedback and analysis.

[0027] The techniques described in this document provide a method for performing automated landing analysis, independently of a reported incident, to provide feedback for optimizing aircraft landing performance.

[0028] With reference now to FIG. 1, a system 100 for an aircraft landing performance analysis system (ALPAS) is illustrated, according to one or more embodiments of the present disclosure. The system 100 includes an aircraft segment 101 and a ground segment 150.

[0029] Aircraft segment 101 includes aircraft landing performance input system 102. Aircraft landing performance input system 102 includes one or more onboard sensors / systems with standard avionics communication interfaces to provide the aircraft landing performance parameters 162 used in performance analysis. Petition 870250062037, dated 07 / 18 / 2025, page 16 / 77 / 19 of landing. For example, the aircraft landing performance input system 102 includes a radio altimeter 104, an air data system 106, a navigation system 108, a main landing gear system 110, an engine system 112, an inertial measurement system 114 and additional aircraft systems 116. It should be understood that other systems and / or devices may be used and provided for analysis.

[0030] Aircraft segment 101 also includes a data concentrator module 118 which includes processor / controller-based hardware with multiple avionics communication interfaces and a software application for data acquisition and interface control.

[0031] A 120 data recorder includes solid-state memory devices and a processor / controller-based hardware with input and output communication interfaces and a software application for data recording.

[0032] A data processing module 122 includes a processor that has input and output communication interfaces and software applications to perform aircraft landing performance analysis on aircraft landing performance parameters 162 received from the aircraft landing performance input system 102. The data processing module 122 calculates the deviation of the landing distance from at least one of the FAA regulatory requirements, an estimate of in-flight landing distance, and a historical average landing distance. Further analysis can be performed to calculate deviations in key parameters during various phases of landing (i.e., approach, flare, touchdown, and ground roll) with reference to the standard landing procedure.

[0033] A pilot's cockpit display system 124 includes a digital display, processor / controller-based hardware with data / video input interface and a software application to control the Petition 870250062037, dated 07 / 18 / 2025, page 17 / 77 / 19 interfaces and the digital display. The digital display is configured to display a graphical user interface (GUI) to show information to a pilot viewing the digital display.

[0034] A 126 terrestrial server COM system includes a processor / controller-based hardware with an input data interface and an output interface module for a datalink and a software application to receive data from the data processing module and send / receive data to / from the terrestrial server via a communication network.

[0035] A communication network 152 and cloud services 132 interconnects the aircraft segment 101 and a ground segment 150. In one or more embodiments, the communication network 152 includes an airport gateway communication 128 and additional modules 130. Non-limiting examples of the additional modules 130 may include other communication systems such as Wi-Fi, cellular and the like.

[0036] Ground segment 150 includes networked ground servers 142. Networked ground servers 142 include a landing analysis framework 144. The data analysis framework 144 provides a standard analysis tool for analyzing aircraft landing performance parameters 162. Networked ground servers 142 also include the landing gear performance database 146. Ground servers 142 in ground segment 150 include a landing performance diagnostic module 148. In one or more modes, the data processing module 122 calculates deviations in landing performance in response to aircraft landing performance parameters 162. The landing performance diagnostic module 148 also identifies the root causes of deviations. The landing performance diagnostic module 148 communicates with subsystems, including health monitoring and data analysis 136, maintenance 138, and pilot training 140.Other options may include other systems that are coupled to the servers. Petition 870250062037, dated 07 / 18 / 2025, page 18 / 77 / 19 terrestrial network 142.

[0037] Aircraft segment 101 of system 101 acquires and records aircraft data from aircraft landing performance input system 102 and historical landing data from ground servers 142 and cloud services 132. Data processing module 122 analyzes aircraft landing performance after landing based on recorded data from aircraft landing performance input system 102. The data processing module then provides landing performance deviation data and aircraft landing performance parameters 162 to cloud service 132 and ground segment 150.

[0038] Ground segment 150 of system 101 provides landing performance diagnostic module 148 to perform diagnostics of deviations in landing performance and presents the diagnosis in a diagnostic report in GUI 600 to display the landing performance diagnostic report. Landing performance diagnostic module 148 also archives the diagnostic report in a landing performance database 146.

[0039] In one or more modes, deviations in landing performance may be associated with a single pilot, a single aircraft, a single aircraft model, etc., or any combination thereof. It should be understood that other components, such as processors, databases, modules, etc., may be used in the system.

[0040] With reference now to FIG. 2, with continued reference to FIG. 1, a method 200 for an automated analysis of deviation in aircraft landing performance is illustrated according to one or more embodiments of the present disclosure. In one embodiment, method 200 can be performed by system 100 of FIG. 1. In one embodiment, method 200 can be performed specifically by the networked ground server 142 of FIG. 1. Petition 870250062037, dated 07 / 18 / 2025, p. 19 / 77 / 19

[0041] In block 202, one or more aircraft landing performance parameters 162 for one or more landing phases are received. In one or more modes, the aircraft landing performance parameters 162 are collected by the aircraft landing performance input system 102 and may include data that were recorded on the aircraft by a data recorder, which may be provided to the data processing module 122 as inputs for analysis. In one or more modes, the inputs for landing performance analysis include a plurality of data, measurements, and parameters. In some modes, sensor measurements, subsystem status parameters, flight plan data, and computed parameters are used to analyze aircraft landing performance.

[0042] Non-limiting examples of sensor measurement data may include radio altitude, outside air temperature, pressure altitude, airspeed, ground speed, vertical speed, aircraft pitch angle, aircraft pitch rate, aircraft roll angle, aircraft heading, aircraft latitude, aircraft longitude, fuel weight, aircraft 3D acceleration vector, etc.

[0043] Non-limiting examples of subsystem state parameters may include main landing gear state, nose landing gear state, wheel weight state, brake control output, brake device deployment state, reverse thruster deployment state, etc.

[0044] Flight plan database data can be retrieved. This data may include runway heading, runway length, runway boundary latitude and longitude, and runway landing zone boundaries. Computed parameters may include an estimate of the in-flight landing distance. It should be understood that other types of flight and landing data may be available. Petition 870250062037, dated 07 / 18 / 2025, page 20 / 77 / 19 used.

[0045] In block 204, a deviation in landing performance is determined for each of the one or more landing phases in response to one or more aircraft landing performance parameters 162. In some embodiments, the deviation in landing performance may be calculated with respect to (i.e., based on) FAA regulatory requirements, estimates of in-flight landing parameters, and historical average performance of an aircraft under similar conditions. The one or more landing phases include at least one of an approach phase, a flare phase, a landing phase, and a ground roll phase after landing (see also FIG. 5).

[0046] In block 206, at least one of a system failure, a fault, and a pilot error that could have led to deviations in landing performance are identified for each of the one or more landing phases. In block 208, a fault tree for the deviations in landing performance is developed for each of the one or more landing phases. The fault tree includes the system failure, a fault, and a pilot error determined in block 206. In block 210, the measurable parameters, calculable parameters, inferable parameters, or observable parameters are identified within the fault tree. An example of a fault tree is illustrated in FIG. 3 and discussed here. In block 212, the fault tree is modeled in a high-level reasoning model using a standard inference methodology. The standard inference methodology can be a Bayesian network.

[0047] In block 214, a root cause analysis is performed by feeding measurable parameters and calculable parameters as inputs into the high-level reasoning model. The measurable parameters (e.g., altitude, airspeed, bank angle) are obtained from the flight data recorded from the aircraft landing performance input system 102. The measurable parameters are then used to Petition 870250062037, dated 07 / 18 / 2025, page 21 / 77 / 19 calculate the calculable parameters, including, among others, flight path angle, range, ground speed, wind speed, wind direction, and bearing. The inferable parameters are inferred by applying the high-level reasoning model using the measurable parameters and the calculable parameters.

[0048] In block 216, a root cause of the deviation in landing performance is identified in response to the root cause analysis. The main causes of the deviations in landing performance are identified using the logical and probabilistic relationship established by the high-level reasoning model between high-level faults and lower-level system faults, failures, or pilot errors. High- and low-level faults are classified based on their position in the 300 fault tree hierarchy (see FIG. 3). For example, in FIG. 3, the high-level fault Deviation in rounding is caused by a low-level fault Fuel injection through fault propagation defined by the 300 fault tree.

[0049] A root cause can be determined for each deviation in landing performance. Each root cause has an associated conditional probability of occurrence, and the higher the probability value of the root cause, the greater the contribution to high-level failures. Probability tables for the root causes that establish the relationship between deviations in the high-level reasoning model are initially provided by a systems expert, but can be updated and refined using trend analysis of field failures and input from a maintenance team.

[0050] In block 218, the root cause of the deviation in landing performance is displayed. In one or more modes, the root cause of the deviation in landing performance is presented to the maintenance team through a landing performance application of the ground display system 600. In other modes, the root cause system failure is transmitted to a Petition 870250062037, dated 07 / 18 / 2025, page 22 / 77 / 19 ground server or other external system for further storage and analysis. The deviations in landing performance identified can generally be treated as high-level failures. Lower-level failures are the primary causes of higher-level failures. Any intermediate-level failure is considered a low-level failure. For example, in FIG. 3, the high-level failure Deviation in rounding is caused by a low-level failure Fuel injection through fault propagation defined by fault tree 300.

[0051] Measurable parameters, calculable parameters, inferable parameters, or observable parameters are identified within the fault tree according to block 210 using the 310 labels and 320 indexing. The labels include M, C, I, O, where M indicates a measurable parameter, C indicates a calculable parameter, I indicates inferable parameters, and O indicates an observable parameter. The 320 indexing can be a sequential number next to the 310 label, such as 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, etc. The 310 labels, along with the 320 indexing, help to identify and simplify their use in mathematical calculations.

[0052] With reference now to FIG. 4, with continued reference to FIGS. 1 to 3, an example of fault tree 400 illustrates the analysis steps to derive the probability of throttle control failure, given a boost control failure (i.e., the probability of throttle control being the root cause of boost control failure), according to an embodiment of the present disclosure. In the example of fault tree 400, a fault tree 410 for boost control failure 420 is represented showing a dependency between each of the lower-level failures, as shown in FIG. 4. For simplification of the illustration, this example 400 considers only two lower-level failures from FIG. 4, which includes a throttle control failure 412 and a fuel injection failure 414 in the analysis. A complete analysis for a control failure Petition 870250062037, dated 07 / 18 / 2025, page 23 / 77 A pressure of 15 / 19 on a 416 system would address all four of the lowest-level faults, including: pilot lag, throttle control, fuel injection, and airflow.

[0053] Based on the dependency relationship dictated by the system architecture and design, probability / conditional probability tables for each lower-level failure can be defined based on domain knowledge and field history and related to the high-level deviation (i.e., pressure control deviation). FIG. 4 illustrates a probability table 422 for throttle control failure 412, a probability table 424 for fuel injection failure 414, and a probability table 426 for throttle control failure 412. Each probability table illustrates the probability of a true “T” and false “F” deviation.

[0054] After defining these probability tables 422, 424, 426, based on the dependence of each component, the probability of throttle control failure being the root cause of thrust control failure is calculated by applying a Bayesian conditional probability formula, as illustrated in equation (i) as follows: Thrust = T | Thrust =

[0055] Once the values ​​in probability tables 422, 424, 426 are substituted into the previous equation, the result shows a 62% probability of throttle control failure, provided there is a thrust control failure. This is to illustrate that, for a given deviation or identified deviation (through measurable or calculable parameters), the root causes can be identified with their probability of occurrence. The same approach can be applied to identify the root causes of other failures and present a list of the main failures that could have caused the deviations in performance during the flare phase and all other landing phases. Petition 870250062037, dated 07 / 18 / 2025, page 24 / 77 / 19

[0056] With reference now to FIG. 5, Table 500 for an automated aircraft landing analysis is illustrated, according to one or more modes. Table 500 describes the factors used to distinguish when each phase begins and ends. The phases include the approach phase, the flare phase, the landing phase, and the ground roll phase after landing.

[0057] The flare phase begins when the radio altitude is less than the height limit. In one mode, the flare height limit is a configurable limit. Furthermore, the flare phase begins when the aircraft pitch transitions from negative to positive pitch rate and the engine is in idle position. The flare phase ends when the weight-on-wheels (WoW) state is true and the radio altitude is 0 feet.

[0058] After the rounding phase, the touchdown phase begins when the WoW value is true and the radio altitude is 0 feet. The touchdown phase continues until the aircraft's braking devices are fully deployed.

[0059] The ground roll phase after landing begins when the WoW value is true and the braking devices are fully activated and continues until the ground speed is less than a limit speed threshold (e.g., 20 km / h).

[0060] Referring now to FIG. 6, a GUI 600 for an automated aircraft landing analysis is illustrated, according to one or more modes. The GUI 600 is primarily displayed on a ground server. The GUI 600 provides a graphical representation of landing performance diagnostics to report to the pilot, crew, and / or maintenance team. The GUI 600 can be updated with each aircraft landing. The GUI 600 is segmented into different quadrants or zones, including a first zone 610, a second zone 630, a third zone 650, and a fourth zone 670. Petition 870250062037, dated 07 / 18 / 2025, p. 25 / 77 / 19

[0061] The first zone 610 displays several icons 612, each icon 612 representing a major aircraft subsystem or component that is part of the landing process. The icons 612 of systems that are diagnosed as having degradation or failures that contribute to deviations in landing performance are highlighted or illuminated. The GUI 600 user can select any of the highlighted system 612 icons to see details of the system degradation or failures in the third zone 650 and recommended maintenance actions in the fourth zone 670. In the example illustrated in FIG. 6, the icon representing the fuel system is highlighted.

[0062] The second zone 630 displays the fault tree 632 corresponding to the faults of the system selected in zone 1. Root cause faults that contribute to high-level faults in fault tree 632 are highlighted. Advantageously, this can help a GUI 600 user understand all low-level faults that can cause high-level faults in the system and focus on the maintenance aspects of the highlighted components. In the example illustrated in FIG. 6, thrust control and fuel injection are highlighted in fault tree 632.

[0063] The third zone 650 displays a more detailed textual description of the root cause failures highlighted in the second zone 630. The fourth zone 670 displays recommended maintenance actions derived from the maintenance manual for the root cause failures described in the third zone 650. The fourth zone 670 may also provide a hyperlink 680 to the specific section of the digital maintenance manual that provides a detailed description of the maintenance actions that need to be performed to correct the root cause failure. The representation may be updated as the aircraft performs a landing on different runways.

[0064] Techniques are provided for regularly detecting, analyzing, and addressing deviations in landing performance, including those that may Petition 870250062037, dated 07 / 18 / 2025, page 26 / 77 / 19 does not result in a serious or noticeable incident. Furthermore, the collected data can be used to validate the pilot's observations and records on landing performance. Feedback on landing performance can be provided to the pilot and / or airlines efficiently. The techniques described herein provide a method and system for improving landing performance and early detection of aircraft maintenance problems.

[0065] A detailed description of one or more embodiments of the apparatus and method disclosed is presented herein by way of example and not limitation, with reference to the Figures.

[0066] The term about is intended to include the degree of error associated with measuring the specific quantity based on the equipment available at the time the request is submitted.

[0067] The terminology used in this document is intended to describe particular modalities only and is not intended to limit the present disclosure. As used in this document, the singular forms “a”, “an”, some and any are intended to also include plural forms, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. It will also be understood that the terms “comprises” and / or “comprising,” when used in this descriptive report, specify the presence of indicated features, integers, steps, operations, elements and / or components, but do not preclude the presence or addition of other features, integers, steps, operations, element components and / or groups thereof.

[0068] Although the present invention is described with reference to an example of embodiment or embodiments, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that various alterations may be made and equivalents may be substituted for elements thereof without departing from the scope of the present disclosure. Furthermore, many modifications may be made to adapt a situation or material to the teachings of this disclosure without departing from the scope of the present disclosure. Petition 870250062037, dated 07 / 18 / 2025, p. 27 / 77 / 19, to deviate from its essential scope. Therefore, it is intended that this disclosure not be limited to the specific modality described as the best method contemplated for carrying out this disclosure, but that this disclosure include all modalities that fall within the scope of the claims.

Claims

1. Method (200) for an automated aircraft landing analysis, characterized in that the method comprises: receiving (202) one or more aircraft landing performance parameters for one or more landing phases; determining (204) a deviation in landing performance for each of those one or more landing phases in response to those one or more aircraft landing performance parameters; identifying (206) at least one of a system fault, a failure, and a pilot error that could have led to the deviations in landing performance for each of those one or more landing phases; developing (208) a fault tree (300, 400, 410, 632) for the deviations in landing performance for each of those one or more landing phases;identify (210) measurable parameters and calculable parameters within the fault tree (300, 400, 410, 632), wherein the measurable parameters are obtained from a recorded flight data from an aircraft landing performance input system (102), and wherein the calculable parameters are calculated based on the measurable parameters; convert (212) the fault tree (300, 400, 410, 632) into a high-level reasoning model using a standard inference methodology; perform (214) a root cause analysis, feeding the measurable parameters and the calculable parameters as inputs into the high-level reasoning model; identify (216) a root cause of the deviation in landing performance based on the root cause analysis; Petition 870250062037, dated 07 / 18 / 2025, p. 29 / 77 2 / 6 display (218) the root cause of the deviation in landing performance; determine a recommended maintenance action in response to the root cause analysis;and display the recommended maintenance action.

2. Method according to claim 1, characterized in that one or more landing phases include at least one of an approach phase, a flare phase, a landing phase, and a ground roll phase after landing.

3. Method according to claim 1, characterized in that it further comprises: determining a specific section of a digital maintenance manual that provides a detailed description of said recommended maintenance actions; and displaying a hyperlink (680) to the specific section of a digital maintenance manual that provides the detailed description of said recommended maintenance actions.

4. Method according to claim 1, characterized in that it further comprises: displaying the fault tree (300, 400, 410, 632).

5. A method according to claim 1, characterized in that it further comprises: displaying aircraft systems associated with landing systems; and highlighting an aircraft system that includes the root cause of the deviation in landing performance.

6. Method according to claim 1, characterized in that the deviation in landing performance is based on a deviation of said one or more aircraft landing performance parameters from at least one of a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulatory requirement, a Petition 870250062037, dated July 18, 2025, page 30 / 77 3 / 6 estimate of in-flight landing parameters, or a historical average performance.

7. Method according to claim 1, characterized in that it further comprises: displaying aircraft systems associated with landing systems in a first zone of the graphical user interface; highlighting an aircraft system that includes the root cause of the deviation in landing performance; displaying the fault tree (300, 400, 410, 632) in a second zone of the graphical user interface; determining a recommended maintenance action in response to the root cause analysis; and displaying the recommended maintenance action in a fourth zone of the graphical user interface, wherein the root cause of the deviation in landing performance is displayed in a third zone of the graphical user interface.

8. Method according to claim 1, characterized in that the automated landing analysis is performed independently of a reported incident to provide feedback to optimize the aircraft's landing performance.

9. System (100) for an automated analysis of aircraft landing, characterized in that it comprises: a processor; and a memory comprising computer executable instructions which, when executed by the processor, cause said processor to perform operations for an automated landing analysis, said operations comprising: receiving (202) one or more aircraft landing performance parameters for one or more landing phases; determining (204) a deviation in landing performance for each Petition 870250062037, dated 07 / 18 / 2025, page 31 / 77 4 / 6 one of those one or more landing phases in response to those one or more aircraft landing performance parameters; identifying (206) at least one of a system fault, a failure, and a pilot error that could have led to the deviations in landing performance for each of those one or more landing phases;develop (208) a fault tree (300, 400, 410, 632) for the deviations in landing performance for each of those one or more landing phases; identify (210) measurable parameters and calculable parameters within the fault tree (300, 400, 410, 632), wherein the measurable parameters are obtained from a recorded flight data from an aircraft landing performance input system (102), wherein the calculable parameters are calculated based on the measurable parameters; convert (212) the fault tree (300, 400, 410, 632) into a high-level reasoning model using a standard inference methodology; perform (214) a root cause analysis, feeding the measurable parameters and the calculable parameters as inputs into the high-level reasoning model; identify (216) a root cause of the deviation in landing performance based on root cause analysis; display (218) the root cause of the deviation in landing performance;Determine a recommended maintenance action in response to the root cause analysis; and display the recommended maintenance action.

10. System according to claim 9, characterized in that one or more landing phases include at least one of Petition 870250062037, dated 07 / 18 / 2025, page 32 / 77 5 / 6 an approach phase, a flare phase, a landing phase, and a ground roll phase after landing.

11. System according to claim 9, characterized in that the operations further comprise: determining a specific section of a digital maintenance manual that provides a detailed description of said recommended maintenance actions; and displaying a hyperlink (680) to the specific section of a digital maintenance manual that provides the detailed description of said recommended maintenance actions.

12. System according to claim 9, characterized in that the operations further comprise: displaying the fault tree (300, 400, 410, 632).

13. System according to claim 9, characterized in that the operations further comprise: displaying aircraft systems associated with landing systems; and highlighting an aircraft system that includes the root cause of the deviation in landing performance.

14. System according to claim 9, characterized in that the deviation in landing performance is based on a deviation of said one or more aircraft landing performance parameters from at least one of a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulatory requirement, an estimate of in-flight landing parameters, or a historical average performance.

15. System according to claim 9, characterized in that the operations further comprise: displaying aircraft systems associated with landing systems in a first zone of the graphical user interface; highlighting an aircraft system that includes the root cause of the deviation in landing performance; displaying the fault tree (300, 400, 410, 632) in a second zone of the graphical user interface; determining a recommended maintenance action in response to the root cause analysis; and displaying the recommended maintenance action in a fourth zone of the graphical user interface, wherein the root cause of the deviation in landing performance is displayed in a third zone of the graphical user interface.

16. System according to claim 9, characterized in that the operations for automated landing analysis are performed independently of a reported incident to provide feedback to optimize the aircraft's landing performance.

Images