Crew performance evaluation method, equipment and media for airworthiness verification of aircraft go-around procedures

Abstract

The present invention discloses a crew performance evaluation method, equipment and medium for the airworthiness verification of an aircraft go-around procedure, and relates to the technical field of aviation human factors design and airworthiness verification. The method comprises: constructing a go-around scenario; the go-around scenario is used to describe the dynamic relationship of the "crew-aircraft-environment" system in the go-around decision and the execution of the go-around procedure; constructing a crew performance evaluation index system; the crew performance evaluation index system includes multiple performance component dimensions and corresponding evaluation means and evaluation indicators; using the ordinal relationship analysis method to determine the weight of each indicator of the crew performance evaluation index system, and calculating the comprehensive evaluation result of the crew's go-around performance based on the go-around scenario and the evaluation model. The present invention can realize crew performance evaluation in multiple dimensions.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the field of aviation human factors design and airworthiness verification technology, and in particular to a crew performance evaluation method, equipment and medium for airworthiness verification of an aircraft go-around procedure. Background Art

[0002] Human factor design and verification have become an essential element in the type certification of transport aircraft under CCAR / FAR / CS-25, and are crucial to ensuring the reliability of crew mission flight and the reduction and management of errors. Both EASA and FAA have issued special clause 25.1302 on human factors. China also drew on clause 25.1302 of EASA and FAA to guide human factor design and verification in the development and airworthiness certification of C919. Human factors are a dynamic process based on flight missions. All airworthiness verification work revolves around flight missions, and the performance of pilots in completing missions is the most important criterion for human factor airworthiness verification. The current crew performance evaluation for airworthiness certification has the following problems:

[0003] 1) Using the CH / SWAT / NASA-TLX scale to evaluate crew workload as the main comprehensive verification method for human factor airworthiness compliance only evaluates a single dimension of crew performance, which cannot comprehensively evaluate the crew's performance during mission flight and is a subjective evaluation model.

[0004] 2) Evaluating crew performance based on flight trajectory deviation ignores the crew and human-machine interaction information during the flight. It is a result-oriented evaluation method that cannot reflect the dynamic cockpit human-machine interaction process, does not support the airworthiness assessment of human factors in the cockpit, and cannot scientifically and systematically evaluate crew performance.

[0005] 3) Using wearable systems to collect eye movements, EEG, ECG, skin electricity, etc. to evaluate crew performance has the advantages of being dynamic and objective. However, currently, only a single or two dimensions of crew performance are evaluated, and the relationship between the above characteristics and the performance component dimensions has not been established. As a result, it is more used to monitor the mental state of the crew, but a comprehensive crew performance evaluation method that meets the human factor airworthiness certification has not been established.

[0006] Therefore, current evaluation methods are unable to achieve objective, systematic and multi-dimensional crew performance evaluation. Go-around is an important part of civil aircraft flight in the actual flight environment, which ensures the flight safety of the aircraft. The accuracy of the airworthiness verification of its procedures is an issue that needs to be urgently addressed. Summary of the invention

[0007] The purpose of the present invention is to provide a crew performance evaluation method, equipment and medium for airworthiness verification of an aircraft go-around procedure, which can realize crew performance evaluation in a multi-dimensional and systematic manner.

[0008] To achieve the above object, the present invention provides the following solutions:

[0009] A crew performance evaluation method for airworthiness verification of an aircraft go-around procedure, comprising:

[0010] Constructing a missed approach scenario; the missed approach scenario is used to describe the dynamic relationship of the "crew-aircraft-environment" system in the missed approach decision and the execution of the missed approach procedure;

[0011] Constructing a unit performance evaluation index system; the unit performance evaluation index system includes multiple performance component dimensions and corresponding evaluation methods and evaluation indicators;

[0012] The weight of each indicator of the crew performance evaluation index system is determined by using the ordinal relationship analysis method, and the comprehensive evaluation result of the crew's go-around performance is calculated based on the go-around scenario and the evaluation model.

[0013] Optionally, the "crew-aircraft-environment" system includes: cockpit components, crew components and environmental components; wherein the cockpit components include: control devices, display systems and alarm systems; the crew components include: PF crew members and PM crew members; the environmental components include: layout, weather, color, route, lighting and airport.

[0014] Optionally, the performance component dimensions include: task quality, workload, situational awareness, stress level, attention allocation and teamwork;

[0015] The evaluation means for the task quality include correct decision and flight trajectory deviation; the evaluation means for the workload include NASA-TLX and ECG; the evaluation means for the situational awareness include SART and eye movement; the evaluation means for the stress level include SQR and ECG; the evaluation means for the attention allocation is eye movement; the evaluation means for the teamwork is voice command;

[0016] The evaluation index of correct decision is the correct decision rate; the evaluation index of flight trajectory deviation is the trajectory deviation distance; the evaluation index of NASA-TLX is the NASA-TLX value; the evaluation index of SART is the SART value; the evaluation index of SQR is the SQR value; the evaluation index of ECG includes heart rate and heart rate variability; the evaluation index of eye movement includes average glance time and average fixation time; the evaluation index of voice command is the correct execution of the command.

[0017] Optionally, the evaluation model is specifically expressed as:

[0018] S=w 1 I TQ +w 2 IWL +w 3 I SA +w 4 I SL +w 5 I DA +w 6 I TW

[0019] Among them, w 1 ~w 6 I represents the indicator weights of task quality, workload, situational awareness, stress level, attention allocation and teamwork respectively; TQ Indicates the quality of the task; I WL Indicates workload; I SA Indicates situational awareness; I SL Indicates stress level; I DA Indicates attention allocation; I TW Indicates teamwork.

[0020] Optionally, the calculation process of each dimension in the evaluation model includes:

[0021] The task quality is achieved by using the correct decision S ch and flight path deviation S ds To measure, the specific calculation is:

[0022]

[0023]

[0024]

[0025] in, is the mission quality of a single go-around in airworthiness verification, n is the number of go-arounds, and when the crew makes a correct go-around decision, S ch The value is 1. When the crew makes an incorrect go-around decision, S ch The value is 0, T s Indicates the maximum allowed trajectory deviation, T e Indicates the actual flight trajectory deviation;

[0026] The workload is the NASA-TLX value S obtained by the crew filling in the NASA-TLX table after each missed approach. wl and the mean heart rate S during the crew's go-around test hf and the mean heart rate variability S hrv The specific calculation is:

[0027]

[0028]

[0029] in, represents the workload of the PF crew, represents the workload of the PM crew;

[0030] The situational awareness is the SART value S obtained by the crew filling in the SART table after each go-around. sa and the average fixation time S during the crew's missed approach test af and the average glance time S as To measure, the specific calculation is:

[0031]

[0032]

[0033] in, Indicates the situational awareness of the PF crew, Indicates the situational awareness of the PM crew;

[0034] The stress level is the SQR value S obtained by the crew filling in the SQR table after each go-around. sl and the mean heart rate S during the crew's go-around test hf and the mean heart rate variability S hrv The specific calculation is:

[0035]

[0036]

[0037] in, is the stress level of the PF crew, is the PM crew's stress level;

[0038] The attention distribution is based on the average attention time S of the crew members. af and the average glance time S as The specific calculation is:

[0039]

[0040]

[0041] in, is the attention allocation of the PF crew, and Tti is the single go-around mission time. It is the allocation of attention among PM crew members;

[0042] The teamwork is measured by the voice commands of the PF crew and the PM crew in the missed approach, which is specifically calculated as:

[0043]

[0044] Among them, S ad It indicates the number of voice commands correctly executed in a single missed approach, and To is the number of voice commands that need to be executed.

[0045] Optionally, the average fixation time is fixation time / fixation times, and the average glance time is glance time / glance times.

[0046] The present invention also provides an electronic device, including a memory and a processor, wherein the memory is used to store a computer program, and the processor runs the computer program to enable the electronic device to execute a crew performance evaluation method based on the above-mentioned aircraft go-around procedure airworthiness verification.

[0047] The present invention also provides a computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program, which, when executed by a processor, implements the crew performance evaluation method for airworthiness verification of an aircraft go-around procedure as described above.

[0048] According to the specific embodiments provided by the present invention, the present invention discloses the following technical effects:

[0049] The present invention discloses a crew performance evaluation method, device and medium for airworthiness verification of aircraft go-around procedures, the method comprising constructing a go-around scenario; the go-around scenario is used to describe the dynamic relationship of the "crew-aircraft-environment" system in the go-around decision and the execution of the go-around procedure; constructing a crew performance evaluation index system; the crew performance evaluation index system comprises a plurality of performance component dimensions and corresponding evaluation means and evaluation indicators; using the ordinal relationship analysis method to determine the weight of each indicator of the crew performance evaluation index system, and calculating the crew go-around performance comprehensive evaluation result based on the go-around scenario and the evaluation model. The present invention can realize crew performance evaluation in multiple dimensions. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0050] In order to more clearly illustrate the embodiments of the present invention or the technical solutions in the prior art, the drawings required for use in the embodiments will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the drawings described below are only some embodiments of the present invention. For ordinary technicians in this field, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without paying creative labor.

[0051] Figure 1 A schematic flow chart of a crew performance evaluation method for airworthiness verification of an aircraft go-around procedure of the present invention;

[0052] Figure 2 Schematic diagram of a missed approach scenario for airworthiness certification in this embodiment

[0053] Figure 3Schematic diagram of the crew go-around performance composition and evaluation index system structure in this embodiment. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0054] The following will be combined with the drawings in the embodiments of the present invention to clearly and completely describe the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention. Obviously, the described embodiments are only part of the embodiments of the present invention, not all of the embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in this field without creative work are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0055] The purpose of the present invention is to provide a crew performance evaluation method, equipment and medium for airworthiness verification of an aircraft go-around procedure, which can realize crew performance evaluation in a multi-dimensional and systematic manner.

[0056] In order to make the above-mentioned objects, features and advantages of the present invention more obvious and easy to understand, the present invention is further described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and specific embodiments.

[0057] like Figure 1 As shown, the present invention provides a crew performance evaluation method for airworthiness verification of an aircraft go-around procedure, comprising:

[0058] Step 100: construct a go-around scenario; the go-around scenario is used to describe the dynamic relationship between the "crew-aircraft-environment" system in the go-around decision and the execution of the go-around procedure; and the go-around scenario for airworthiness certification is constructed according to the go-around procedure of the civil aircraft manufacturer.

[0059] Step 200: constructing a unit performance evaluation index system; the unit performance evaluation index system includes multiple performance component dimensions and corresponding evaluation methods and evaluation indicators;

[0060] Step 300: Determine the weight of each indicator of the crew performance evaluation indicator system by using the ordinal relationship analysis method, and calculate the comprehensive evaluation result of the crew's go-around performance based on the go-around scenario and the evaluation model.

[0061] Among them, the "crew-aircraft-environment" system includes: cockpit components, crew components and environmental components; among them, the cockpit components include: control devices, display systems and alarm systems; the crew components include: PF crew members and PM crew members; the environmental components include: layout, weather, color, route, lighting and airport.

[0062] The performance components include: task quality, workload, situational awareness, stress, attention allocation and teamwork; more specifically:

[0063] The evaluation means corresponding to the task quality include correct decision and flight trajectory deviation; the evaluation means corresponding to the workload include NASA-TLX and electrocardiogram; the evaluation means corresponding to the situational awareness include SART and eye movement; the evaluation means corresponding to the stress level include SQR and electrocardiogram; the evaluation means corresponding to the attention allocation is eye movement; the evaluation means corresponding to the team collaboration is voice command; the evaluation indicator of correct decision is the correct decision rate; the evaluation indicator of flight trajectory deviation is the trajectory deviation distance; the evaluation indicator of NASA-TLX is the NASA-TLX value; the evaluation indicator of SART is the SART value; the evaluation indicator of SQR is the SQR value; the evaluation indicators of electrocardiogram include heart rate and heart rate variability; the evaluation indicators of eye movement include average scanning time and average fixation time; the evaluation indicator of voice command is the correct execution of the command.

[0064] The average fixation time is fixation time / fixation times, and the average glance time is glance time / glance times.

[0065] As a specific implementation of step 100, construct Figure 2 The go-around scenario shown is used to describe the dynamic relationship of "crew-aircraft-environment" in the go-around decision and execution of the go-around procedure. Select qualified pilots who meet the requirements of Article 25.1302 to form a two-person crew to conduct a go-around test on a full-motion simulator with a complete cockpit and a high fidelity level that meets the airworthiness manufacturing compliance requirements. Set typical go-around scenarios and tasks according to the expected operating environment.

[0066] As a specific implementation of step 200, crew go-around performance is the ability of the crew to complete the mission requirements and is the product of the input and output conversion process of the "crew-aircraft-environment" system in the practice of the go-around scenario. From a system perspective, crew performance is divided into six dimensions: mission quality, workload, situational awareness, stress, teamwork and attention allocation. The evaluation means of each dimension are defined: mission quality is measured by correct decision-making and flight trajectory deviation, workload is measured by the NASA-TLX scale, situational awareness is measured by the Situational Awareness Rating Technique (SART) scale, stress is measured by the Stress Rating Questionnaire (SRQ) scale, teamwork is measured by the voice instructions communicated by the PF crew and the PM crew during the go-around procedure, and attention allocation is measured by eye movement. In addition, the crew's electrocardiogram and eye movement are used to correct the subjectivity of workload, situational awareness and stress evaluation.

[0067] In step 300, if Figure 3As shown in the figure, the six components of crew go-around performance are used as performance evaluation indicators, and the ordinal relationship analysis method (G1 method) is used to determine the weight of each indicator, which is marked as w 1 ~w 6 The evaluation model is specifically expressed as:

[0068] S=w 1 I TQ +w 2 I WL +w 3 I SA +w 4 I SL +w 5 I DA +w 6 I TW

[0069] Among them, w 1 ~w 6 I represents the indicator weights of task quality, workload, situational awareness, stress level, attention allocation and teamwork respectively; TQ Indicates the quality of the task; I WL Indicates workload; I SA Indicates situational awareness; I SL Indicates stress level; I DA Indicates attention allocation; I TW Indicates teamwork.

[0070] Optionally, the calculation process of each dimension in the evaluation model includes:

[0071] The task quality is achieved by using the correct decision S ch and flight path deviation S ds To measure, the specific calculation is:

[0072]

[0073]

[0074]

[0075] in, is the mission quality of a single go-around in airworthiness verification, n is the number of go-arounds, and when the crew makes a correct go-around decision, S ch The value is 1. When the crew makes an incorrect go-around decision, S ch The value is 0, T s represents the maximum trajectory deviation, T e Indicates the actual flight trajectory deviation;

[0076] The workload is the NASA-TLX value S obtained by the crew filling in the NASA-TLX table after each missed approach. wl and the mean heart rate S during the crew's go-around test hf and the mean heart rate variability S hrv The specific calculation is:

[0077]

[0078]

[0079] in, It represents the workload of PF crew members, which is equal to the product of the quotient of the mean of the heart rhythm and its variability of all crew members participating in the go-around test and the mean of the heart rhythm and its variability of the PF crew members and the mean of the NASA-TLX value of the PF crew members. Represents the workload of the PM crew.

[0080] The situational awareness is the SART value S obtained by the crew filling in the SART table after each go-around. sa and the average fixation time S during the crew's missed approach test af and the average glance time S as To measure, the specific calculation is:

[0081]

[0082]

[0083] in, It represents the situational awareness of the PF crew members, which is equal to the product of the quotient of the mean of the average fixation time and the average glance time of all crew members participating in the go-around test and the mean of the average fixation time and the average glance time of the PF crew members and the mean of the SART values ​​of the PF crew members. Indicates the situational awareness of the PM crew;

[0084] The stress level is the SQR value S obtained by the crew filling in the SQR table after each go-around. sl and the mean heart rate S during the crew's go-around test hf and the mean heart rate variability S hrv The specific calculation is:

[0085]

[0086]

[0087] in, It is the stress level of the PF crew, which is equal to the product of the quotient of the mean of the heart rhythm and its variability of all crew members participating in the go-around test and the mean of the heart rhythm and its variability of the PF crew and the mean of the SQR value of the PF crew. is the PM crew's stress level;

[0088] The attention distribution is based on the average attention time S of the crew members. af and the average glance time S as The specific calculation is:

[0089]

[0090]

[0091] in, is the attention allocation of the PF crew, and Tti is the single go-around mission time. It is the allocation of attention among PM crew members;

[0092] The teamwork is measured by the voice commands of the PF crew and the PM crew in the missed approach, which is specifically calculated as:

[0093]

[0094] Among them, S ad It indicates the number of voice commands correctly executed in a single missed approach, and To is the number of voice commands that need to be executed.

[0095] Input the go-around procedure to be verified for airworthiness, conduct a go-around verification flight test based on step 100, collect the data required for crew performance evaluation based on step 200, and calculate and output the comprehensive evaluation result of the crew's go-around performance based on the performance evaluation indicator system and model of step 300.

[0096] Based on the above technical solution, the following embodiments are provided.

[0097] The present invention takes the missed approach procedure of MA600 aircraft as an example, and implements the crew performance evaluation for the airworthiness verification of the missed approach procedure of CCAR25 aircraft through the following steps:

[0098] 1) According to the missed approach procedure in the MA600 aircraft flight manual, refer to Figure 1Construct a go-around scenario for airworthiness certification: The simulator is a full-motion simulator of the MA600 aircraft that has passed the CCAR-60 and its advisory circular. The cockpit control components, information display and warning system of the simulator are consistent with those of the MA600 aircraft, and have a consistent go-around procedure. Select 4 qualified pilots with different flight experience to form a two-person crew. Set the weather, airport, route and go-around mission: Go-around mission 1, go-around at the lowest altitude in the event of a strong crosswind or runway intrusion during the approach; Go-around mission 2, go-around that corrects an erroneous approach and does not meet the landing configuration.

[0099] 2)Reference Figure 2 Establish the system framework of the component dimensions and multi-channel measurement indicators of crew go-around performance: crew performance is evaluated according to six dimensions: task quality, workload, situational awareness, stress, teamwork and attention allocation during go-around. Among them, task quality is measured by correct decision-making and flight trajectory deviation, crew workload is measured by NASA-TLX scale and electrocardiogram index, crew situational awareness is measured by SART scale and eye movement index, stress is measured by SRQ scale and electrocardiogram index, teamwork is measured by voice instructions of crew communication during go-around, and attention allocation is measured by eye movement index.

[0100] 3) Establish a crew performance evaluation index system, use the G1 method to determine the weight of each index, and construct a comprehensive evaluation model for crew go-around performance: According to formulas (1) to (13), the specific calculation method of the comprehensive evaluation model for crew go-around performance is established.

[0101] 4) Conduct go-around verification flight tests, with test scenarios such as Figure 3 As shown in the figure, the data required for crew performance evaluation is collected, and the comprehensive evaluation results of the crew's go-around performance are calculated and output:

[0102] a) The four test pilots determined in step 1 are randomly divided into two crews (PF / PM). Two sets of Tobii ProGlasses 2 eye trackers are used to record the eye movement behaviors of the PF and PM test pilots during the flight experiment. Two sets of chest-mounted BMD 101 electrocardiographs matched with the control software via Bluetooth record the ECG of the crew. The scene camera of the Tobii Pro Glasses 2 eye tracker will collect the voice commands and their execution status of the crew's communication and collaboration during the go-around procedure.

[0103] b) After completing the wearing and calibration of the eye tracker and electrocardiograph, the two crews successively performed Task 1 on the MA600 full-motion simulator and filled in the NASA-TLX, SART, and SQR scales. After a 30-minute rest, the two crews successively performed Task 2. Then they exchanged PF / PM roles and performed the two tasks again.

[0104] c) After the two crews complete the two missed approach missions, 8 sets of individual performance evaluation data (PF4 group, PM4 group) and 4 sets of "aircraft + crew" data will be generated. Substitute the data into formulas (1) to (13) to calculate the output crew missed approach performance. The average fixation time is fixation time / fixation times, and the average glance time is glance time / glance times.

[0105] This embodiment has the following beneficial effects:

[0106] 1) From the perspective of the "crew-aircraft-environment" system based on flight missions, the composition dimensions of crew performance and their evaluation methods are proposed, and a comprehensive crew performance evaluation method for the airworthiness verification of the CCAR25 aircraft go-around procedure is established, providing a feasible compliance verification method for aviation human factors airworthiness. 2) The established performance composition dimensions and their evaluation index system can support the evaluation of human factors in individual or combined control devices, displays and warning systems in the cockpit of civil aircraft. 3) The performance evaluation makes full use of the subjective and objective information of the crew, and is a more scientific and accurate performance evaluation model.

[0107] In addition, the present invention also provides an electronic device, including a memory and a processor, wherein the memory is used to store a computer program, and the processor runs the computer program to enable the electronic device to execute a crew performance evaluation method based on the above-mentioned aircraft go-around procedure airworthiness verification.

[0108] The present invention also provides a computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program, which, when executed by a processor, implements the crew performance evaluation method for airworthiness verification of an aircraft go-around procedure as described above.

[0109] The various embodiments in this specification are described in a progressive manner, and each embodiment focuses on the differences from other embodiments. The same or similar parts between the various embodiments can be referenced to each other.

[0110] This article uses specific examples to illustrate the principles and implementation methods of the present invention. The above examples are only used to help understand the core idea of ​​the present invention. At the same time, for those skilled in the art, according to the idea of ​​the present invention, there will be changes in the specific implementation methods and application scope. In summary, the content of this specification should not be understood as limiting the present invention.

Claims

1. A crew performance evaluation method for aircraft go-around procedure airworthiness verification, characterized in that: include: Constructing a missed approach scenario; the missed approach scenario is used to describe the dynamic relationship between the "crew-aircraft-environment" system in the missed approach decision and the execution of the missed approach procedure; Constructing a unit performance evaluation index system; the unit performance evaluation index system includes multiple performance component dimensions and corresponding evaluation methods and evaluation indicators; Determine the weight of each indicator of the crew performance evaluation indicator system by using the ordinal relationship analysis method, and calculate the comprehensive evaluation result of the crew's go-around performance based on the go-around scenario and the evaluation model; The evaluation model is specifically expressed as follows: S=w1I TQ +w2I WL +w3I SA +w4I SL +w5I DA +w6I TW Among them, w1~w6 represent the indicator weights of task quality, workload, situational awareness, stress level, attention allocation and teamwork respectively; I TQ Indicates the quality of the task; I WL Indicates workload; I SA Indicates situational awareness; I SL Indicates stress level; I DA Indicates attention allocation; I TW It means teamwork; The calculation process of each dimension in the evaluation model includes: The task quality is achieved by using the correct decision S ch and flight path deviation S ds To measure, the specific calculation is: in, is the mission quality of a single go-around in airworthiness verification, n is the number of go-arounds, and when the crew makes a correct go-around decision, S ch The value is 1. When the crew makes an incorrect go-around decision, S ch The value is 0, T s Indicates the maximum allowed trajectory deviation, T e Indicates the actual flight trajectory deviation; The workload is the NASA-TLX value S obtained by the crew filling in the NASA-TLX table after each missed approach. wl and the mean heart rate S during the crew's go-around test hf and the mean heart rate variability S hrv The specific calculation is: in, represents the workload of the PF crew, represents the workload of the PM crew; The situational awareness is the SART value S obtained by the crew filling in the SART table after each go-around. sa and the average fixation time S during the crew's missed approach test af and the average glance time S as To measure, the specific calculation is: in, Indicates the situational awareness of the PF crew, Indicates the situational awareness of the PM crew; The stress level is the SQR value S obtained by the crew filling in the SQR table after each go-around. sl and the mean heart rate S during the crew's go-around test hf and the mean heart rate variability S hrv The specific calculation is: in, is the stress level of the PF crew, is the PM crew's stress level; The attention distribution is based on the average attention time S of the crew members. af and the average glance time S as The specific calculation is: in, is the attention allocation of the PF crew, Tti is the single go-around mission time, It is the allocation of attention among PM crew members; The teamwork is measured by the voice commands of the PF crew and the PM crew in the missed approach, which is specifically calculated as: Among them, S ad It indicates the number of voice commands correctly executed in a single missed approach, and To is the number of voice commands that need to be executed.

2. The crew performance evaluation method for aircraft go-around procedure airworthiness verification according to claim 1, characterized in that: The "crew-aircraft-environment" system includes: cockpit components, crew components and environmental components; wherein the cockpit components include: control devices, display systems and warning systems; the crew components include: PF crew members and PM crew members; the environmental components include: Layout, weather, colour, airways, lighting and airports.

3. The crew performance evaluation method for aircraft go-around procedure airworthiness verification according to claim 1, characterized in that: The performance components include: task quality, workload, situational awareness, stress, attention allocation, and teamwork; The evaluation means for the task quality include correct decision and flight trajectory deviation; the evaluation means for the workload include NASA-TLX and ECG; the evaluation means for the situational awareness include SART and eye movement; the evaluation means for the stress level include SQR and ECG; the evaluation means for the attention allocation is eye movement; the evaluation means for the teamwork is voice command; The evaluation index of correct decision is the correct decision rate; the evaluation index of flight trajectory deviation is the trajectory deviation distance; the evaluation index of NASA-TLX is the NASA-TLX value; the evaluation index of SART is the SART value; the evaluation index of SQR is the SQR value; the evaluation index of ECG includes heart rate and heart rate variability; the evaluation index of eye movement includes average glance time and average fixation time; the evaluation index of voice command is the correct execution of the command.

4. The crew performance evaluation method for aircraft go-around procedure airworthiness verification according to claim 3, characterized in that: The average fixation time is fixation time / fixation times, and the average glance time is glance time / glance times.

5. An electronic device, characterized in that: It comprises a memory and a processor, wherein the memory is used to store a computer program, and the processor runs the computer program to enable the electronic device to execute the crew performance evaluation method for the airworthiness verification of the aircraft go-around procedure according to claims 1-4.

6. A computer-readable storage medium, characterized in that: It stores a computer program, which, when executed by a processor, implements the crew performance evaluation method for the airworthiness verification of the aircraft go-around procedure as described in claims 1-4.

Images