| |
|
|
|
|
Benefits of In-Flight Simulation
- The USAF recommends airborne simulation
as one step in its "best-practices"
in flight control development.
- Are ideally suited and specifically
configured for research and development.
- Are fully-instrumented and the
flight control, display, and pilot-vehicle
interfaces are quickly modified, allowing
in-flight variations and experimental control
of test conditions
- The evaluation pilot can concentrate
on the task or experiment conditions without
having to consciously or subconsciously
being concerned about safety of flight.
- Provide a freedom in research
and development flight testing which critical
in developing proven and flight-ready technologies.
|
|
Airborne
Systems Test & Evaluation
- Airborne Systems Test & Evaluation
can be performed in any of the airborne
test vehicles operated by Calspan:
- USAF Total In-Flight Simulator (TIFS)
NC-131H (Convair 580)
- USAF Variable Stability In-Flight Simulator
Test Aircraft (VISTA) NF-16D
- Learjet Model 24
- Learjet Model 25
- All of these aircraft are capable
of carrying customer-supplied equipment,
which can be tested in the airborne real-world
environment, without needing to be tied
to primary safety-of-flight systems.
- In each of these aircraft, experimental
or prototype equipment can be safely operated
by the evaluation pilot or systems operators
who are separated from the primary flight
control and systems of the base aircraft.
All standard aircraft power and data busses
are available.
- Safety pilots monitor systems
and aircraft operation, and can take over
with normal aircraft controls and systems
with a touch of a systems disengage button.
- The TIFS and Learjets have aft-cabin
crew stations which can be configured for
systems operators who can actually fly the
aircraft while operating and evaluating
the systems under test.
- Calspan IFS Representative Programs:
- Martin Marietta Smart Weapons System
- Avionics and Systems Test & Training Aircraft (ASTTA) configuration of TIFS
- NASA Synthetic Vision Systems
- Helmet-Mounted Display (HMD)
- Voice Recognition System (VRS)
|
 |

 Synthetic Terrain Evaluation at Asheville, NC |
 |
|
|
Flight
Control System Test & Evaluation
- The flight control system test
and evaluation capabilities of Calspan's
Flight Research Group include:
- ground simulation evaluations of control
laws using simple open loop linear aerodynamic
models
- complete 6 degree of freedom IFS evaluations
of nonlinear control systems with higher-order
actuator models
- nonlinear aerodynamic models (using
table-lookups)
- nonlinear equations of motion and
- higher order sensor models.
- At any point in the control system design
process, from initial concept to flight
test evaluations, Calspan is experienced
in thoroughly evaluating control systems
against real world effects.
- These evaluations uncover problems that
left can save designers significant amounts
of R&D expenses.

|
 |
A Calspan Learjet is being used as
a "surrogate" unmanned air vehicle
(UAV) in the USAF Research Laboratory's
Automated Aerial Refueling (AAR) Program. |
 |
|
|
Ground Simulation
Capabilities of Airborne Simulators
- Each of Calspan's aircraft have indigenous ground simulation capabilities which are extremely useful for:
- the checkout of flight systems
- mission rehearsal and
- pilot familiarization in the differences between flight and ground simulation.
|
|
Pilot-Vehicle Interface (PVI) Test and Evaluation
- Calspan's FRG has a long history of association with the:
- United States Navy (USN)
- the United States Air Force (USAF) and
- National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) for the development and advancement of pilot-vehicle interface technologies, particularly Head-Up Displays (HUDs) and Helmet-Mounted Displays (HMDs)
- Beginning in the late 1970s, the USN funded the FRG to modify the USAF NT-33A aircraft to include a programmable HUD. After this modification, the FRG performed several research and development flight test programs for the USAF and USN evaluating the benefits of the HUD for:
- instrument flight
- quantifying performance and workload benefits of different display formats and
- evaluating several critical design issues necessary to design a HUD
|
|
|
|