Aircraft Configuration Checking for Autonomous Transition Validation
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current aviation systems lack efficient methods for automated and autonomous validation of aircraft configuration changes, which increases pilot workload and can lead to errors.
Innovation Solution
A method and system that determine an aircraft state, detect transition events, verify aircraft configurations using a checklist procedure, and autonomously respond to inconsistencies, facilitating human-in-the-loop operation and autonomous validation of configuration changes.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Ease of operation
If automated and autonomous validation methods are implemented, then pilot workload is reduced and safety is improved, but system complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs self-validation by automatically comparing actual aircraft configuration with required configuration using onboard sensors and systems, eliminating the need for manual pilot verification and reducing pilot workload while maintaining safety
Solution Approach 2:
Manual mechanical checklist verification by pilots is replaced with automated electronic validation systems that use sensors, processors, and communication interfaces to detect and verify aircraft configuration changes, reducing human error and workload
2Reliability
If manual configuration verification is performed, then system complexity remains low, but human error increases and safety decreases
Solution Approach 1:
The system continuously monitors aircraft configuration through sensors and provides real-time feedback by comparing actual configuration with required configuration, alerting pilots to any discrepancies and ensuring safety through automated verification
Solution Approach 2:
An automated validation system acts as an intermediary between aircraft systems and pilots, using sensors, processors, and communication interfaces to detect configuration changes and verify compliance, reducing human error while maintaining manageable system complexity
3Measurement precision
If automated validation systems are implemented, then error detection capability is improved, but measurement and detection difficulty increases
Solution Approach 1:
The validation system divides configuration verification into discrete detectable parameters such as gear position, flap angle, and antenna deployment status, allowing precise measurement of each individual configuration element through dedicated sensors
Data Source
AI summary
The method can include: optionally determining an aircraft state; determining a transition event; verifying an aircraft configuration; determining an aircraft alert state; and performing an action. However, the method can additionally or alternatively include any other suitable elements. The method functions to facilitate configuration checking and/or validation of configuration changes. Additionally or alternatively, the method can function to facilitate human-in-the-loop operation of a semi-autonomous aircraft (e.g., with an autonomous agent fulfilling the roles of one pilot of a multi-pilot aircraft). Additionally or alternatively, the method can function to autonomously respond to inconsistencies or failures associated with aircraft configuration changes.