Aircraft Emergency Escape Path Automation for Terrain and Obstacle Constraints

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

The manual determination of emergency escape paths for aircraft during flight emergencies is time-consuming and labor-intensive, requiring specialized analysts and failing to efficiently account for various factors like terrain, obstacles, and performance capabilities.

Innovation Solution

A system and method utilizing a control unit, potentially with AI or machine learning capabilities, to automatically determine emergency escape paths based on aircraft performance, terrain, obstacles, airports, flights, and weather, enabling pre-flight or real-time path determination and display, and automatic operation of the aircraft.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If manual determination of emergency escape paths is used by specialized analysts, then the paths can be customized for specific emergency scenarios, but the process becomes time-consuming and labor-intensive

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvecustomization for specific emergency scenariosVSAvoidtime and labor efficiency

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system enables self-service by allowing the aircraft's own performance data, combined with automated algorithms, to generate emergency escape paths without requiring external specialized analysts. The control unit processes flight parameters, aircraft characteristics, and environmental conditions autonomously to produce customized escape routes.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The manual mechanical process of analysts reviewing documents and calculating escape paths is replaced with an automated electronic system. The control unit uses computer algorithms to process data and generate escape paths, substituting human cognitive and manual work with automated computational processes.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

2Reliability

If manual methods are used to determine emergency escape paths, then regulatory compliance can be achieved through expert judgment, but the process is time-consuming and labor-intensive

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveregulatory complianceVSAvoidtime for path determination

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary actions by pre-loading aircraft performance data, regulatory parameters, and environmental information into the control unit before emergencies occur. This allows the system to rapidly generate compliant escape paths during actual emergencies without needing to consult documents or wait for analyst availability.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system incorporates feedback mechanisms where the control unit continuously monitors flight parameters and compares generated escape paths against regulatory requirements and aircraft performance limits. This automated feedback loop ensures compliance while reducing the time needed for manual verification.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

3Productivity

If automated systems are used to determine emergency escape paths, then time and productivity are improved, but the system complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvespeed of path determinationVSAvoidsystem complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The control unit is designed as a universal system that handles multiple functions: processing aircraft performance data, evaluating environmental conditions, generating escape paths, and verifying regulatory compliance. By consolidating these functions into a single multi-functional unit, the system reduces overall complexity compared to having separate specialized systems for each function.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

4Productivity

If automated determination of emergency escape paths is implemented, then operational efficiency is enhanced, but the initial system development and implementation costs increase

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveoperational efficiencyVSAvoidsystem implementation cost

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The system merges the emergency escape path determination function with the aircraft's existing flight management and control systems. By integrating the control unit with existing avionics and data systems, the patent avoids the need for completely separate hardware and software systems, thereby reducing implementation costs while maintaining operational efficiency.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Data Source

PatentUS20240427336A1Systems and methods for determining emergency escape paths for aircraft

Publication Date: 2024.12.26 THE BOEING CO

AI summary

A system (for determining one or more emergency escape paths for one or more emergencies that can occur during a flight of an aircraft) includes a control unit configured to automatically determine the one or more emergency escape paths for the one or more emergencies based on performance capabilities of the aircraft, terrain within at least a portion of an original flight path or the one or more emergency escape paths, and obstacles within at least a portion of the original flight path or the one or more emergency escape paths.