Stall Recovery in a Centrifuge-Based Flight Simulator With an Extended Aerodynamic Model

REFERENCES

• Abramov, N., Goman, M., Demenkov, M., & Khrabrov, A. (2005). Lateral-directional aircraft dynamics at high incidence flight with account of unsteady aerodynamic effects. AIAA 2005–6331, San Francisco, California.
   Google Scholar
• Abramov, N. B., Goman, M. G., Khrabrov, A. N., Kolesnikov, E. N., Fucke, L., Soemarwoto, B., & Smaili, H. (2012, August). Pushing ahead: SUPRA airplane model for upset recovery. Paper presented at the AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference (AIAA 2012-4631), Minneapolis, MN.
   Google Scholar
• Bles, W., & Groen, E. (2009). The DESDEMONA motion facility: Applications for space research. Microgravity Science and Technology, 21, 281–286. doi:10.1007/s12217-009-9120-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bürki-Cohen, J. (2010, August). Technical challenges of upset recovery training: Simulating the element of surprise. Paper presented at AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference (AIAA 2012-8008), Toronto, ON, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Burks, B. (2009). Upset recovery training: A call for a higher standard of training. In RAeS flight simulation conference: Towards the edge of the envelope (pp. 3–4), June 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Cunningham, K., Foster, J. V., Shah, G. H., Stewart, E. C., Ventura, R. N., Rivers, R. A., … Gato, W. (2005, August). Simulation study of flap effects on a commercial transport airplane in upset conditions. Paper presented at the AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference (AIAA 2005-5908), San Francisco, CA.
   Google Scholar
• European Aviation Safety Agency. (2013). Rulemaking tasks RMT.0581 and RMT. 0582: Loss of control prevention and recovery training. Retrieved from https://www.easa.europa.eu/document-library/terms-of-reference/tor-rmt0581-and-rmt0582
   Google Scholar
• European Aviation Safety Agency. (2014). Annual safety review 2014. Cologne, Germany: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Federal Aviation Administration. (1998). Flight test guide for certification of transport category airplanes (Advisory Circular No. 25-7B). Washington, DC: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Federal Aviation Administration. (2008). Industry airplane upset recovery training aid ( Rev. 2). Retrieved from http://www.faa.gov/pilots/training/
   Google Scholar
• Federal Aviation Administration. (2012). Stall and stick pusher training ( Advisory Circular No. 120-109). Washington, DC: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Gawron, V. J. (2002). Airplane upset training evaluation report ( NASA/CR-2002-211405). Buffalo, NY: Veridian Engineering.
   Google Scholar
• Gawron, V. J., & Peer, J. (2014). Evaluation of airplane upset recovery training. Aviation Psychology and Applied Human Factors, 4(2), 74–85. doi:10.1027/2192-0923/a000059
   Google Scholar
• Goman, M., & Khrabrov, A. (1994). State-space representation of aerodynamic characteristics of an aircraft at high angles of attack. Journal of Aircraft, 31, 1109–1115. doi:10.2514/3.46618
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goman, M. G., Khramtsovsky, A. V., & Kolesnikov, E. N. (2008). Evaluation of aircraft performance and maneuverability by computation of attainable equilibrium sets. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 31, 329–339. doi:10.2514/1.29336
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Groen, E. L., & Bos, J. E. (2008). Simulator sickness depends on frequency of the simulator motion mismatch: An observation. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 17, 584–593. doi:10.1162/pres.17.6.584
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Groen, E. L., Clari, M. S. V. V., & Hosman, R. J. A. W. (2001). Evaluation of perceived motion during a simulated takeoff run. Journal of Aircraft, 38, 600–606. doi:10.2514/2.2827
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Groen, E. L., Ledegang, W. D., Field, J., Smaili, H., Roza, R., Fucke, L., … Biryukov, V. (2012, August). SUPRA: Enhanced upset recovery simulation. Paper presented at the AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference (AIAA 2012-4630), Minneapolis, MN.
   Google Scholar
• Hart, S. G. (2006). NASA–Task Load Index (NASA–TLX): 20 years later. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 50th annual meeting (pp. 904–908). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
   Google Scholar
• Hart, S. G., & Staveland, L. E. (1988). Development of NASA–TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. Advances in Psychology, 52, 139–183.
   Google Scholar
• International Civil Aviation Organization. (2014). Manual of aeroplane upset prevention and recovery ( Doc. No. 10011, AN/506). Montreal, Canada: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Lambregts, A. A., Nesemeier, G., Wilborn, J. E., & Newman, R. L. (2008, August). Airplane upsets: Old problem, new issues. Paper presented at the AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference, Honolulu, HI.
   Google Scholar
• Ledegang, W. D., Groen, E. L., & Wentink, M. (2012). Pilot performance in centrifuge-based simulation of unusual attitude recovery. Journal of Aircraft, 49, 1161–1167. doi:10.2514/1.C031629
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leland, R., Rogers, R. O., Boquet, A., & Glaser, S. (2009). An experiment to evaluate transfer of upset-recovery training conducted using two different flight simulation devices (FAA, DOT/FAA/AM-09/17). Washington, DC: Office of Aerospace Medicine.
   Google Scholar
• Pool, D. M. (2012). Objective evaluation of flight simulator motion cueing fidelity through a cybernetic approach ( Doctoral dissertation). Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands.
   Google Scholar
• Richards, N. D., Gandhi, N., & Bateman, A. J. (2012, August). Improved upset recovery strategies through explicit considerations of pilot dynamic behavior. Paper presented at the AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference (AIAA 2012-4821), Minneapolis, MN.
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, R. O., Boquet, A., Howell, C., & DeJohn, C. (2009). An experiment to evaluate transfer of low-cost simulator-based upset-recovery training. No. DOT/FAA/AM-09/5. Washington, DC: Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Aviation Medicine.
   Google Scholar
• Rubio, S., Díaz, E., Martín, J., & Puente, J. M. (2004). Evaluation of subjective mental workload: A comparison of SWAT, NASA–TLX, and workload profile methods. Applied Psychology, 53, 1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schroeder, J. A. (1999). Helicopter flight simulation motion platform requirements ( Technical Rep. No. NASA-TP-1999-208766). Washington, DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
   Google Scholar
• Schroeder, J. A., Bürki-Cohen, J., Shikany, D. A., Gingras, D. R., & Desrochers, P. (2014, January). An evaluation of several stall models for commercial transport training. Paper presented at the Modeling and Simulation Technology Conference, Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Wentink, M., Bles, W., Hosman, R. J. A. W., & Mayrhofer, M. (2005, August). Design and evaluation of a spherical washout algorithm for the Desdemona simulator. Paper presented at the AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference (AIAA 2005-6501), San Francisco, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Wertheim, A. H., Ooms, J., de Regt, G. P., & Wientjes, C. J. E. (1992). Incidence and severeness of seasickness: Validation of a rating scale (Technical Rep. No. IZF 1992 A-41). Soesterberg, The Netherlands: TNO Institute of Perception.
   Google Scholar
• Zaal, P. M. T. (2011). Pilot control behavior discrepancies between real and simulated flight caused by limited motion stimuli. Delft, The Netherlands: Delft University of Technology.
   Google Scholar