Huseyin Avsar
Joel E. Fischer
Tom Rodden
ABSTRACT
In order to benefit from potential reduced operational costs and crew workload airlines are increasingly interested in touchscreen-based Electronic Flight Bags (EFB). This paper focuses on the specific domain of Search and Rescue (SAR) Helicopters. A first set of results aiming to explore and understand potential benefits and challenges of an EFB in a SAR environment will be presented. A review of related work, operational observations and interviews with pilots were conducted to understand and specify the use context. Digital Human Modelling (DHM) software was used to determine physical constraints of an EFB in this type of flight deck. A scenario was developed which will be used in future to define features, content and functionality that a SAR pilot may wish to see in an EFB. Developed initial interface design guidelines are presented.
- Ahlstrom, V. 2010. HFDS 2003: chapter 14 anthropometry and biomechanics.Google Scholar
- Albinsson, P.-A. and Zhai, S. 2003. High precision touch screen interaction. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '03 (New York, 2003), 105. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ausubel, D.P. et al. 1968. Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Culture, Cognition, and Literacy.Google Scholar
- Avsar, H. et al. 2016. Future flight decks: impact of +Gz on touchscreen usability. International Conference on Human Computer Interaction in Aerospace: HCI-Aero (Paris, 2016). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Avsar, H. et al. 2016. Mixed method approach in designing flight decks with touchscreens: A framework. 2016 IEEE/AIAA 35th Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC) (Sacramento, 2016).Google Scholar
- Avsar, H. et al. 2016. Physical and environmental considerations for touchscreen integration on the flight deck. Unpublished. (2016).Google Scholar
- Avsar, H. et al. 2015. Target size guidelines for interactive displays on the flight deck. 2015 IEEE/AIAA 34th Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC) (Prague, Sep. 2015), 3C4-1--3C4-15.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bergstrom-Lehtovirta, J. et al. 2011. The effects of walking speed on target acquisition on a touchscreen interface. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices - MobileHCI '11. (2011), 143--146. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Chandra, D. et al. 2003. Human factors considerations in the design and evaluation of Electronic Flight Bags (EFBs), Version 2. http://ntl.bts.gov/lib/34000/ ... . (2003).Google Scholar
- Civil Aviation Authority 2008. CAP 780 - Aviation safety review.Google Scholar
- Civil Aviation Safety Authority Australia 2013. Electronic Flight Bags.Google Scholar
- Degani, A. et al. 1992. "Soft" Controls for hard displays: still a challenge. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (1992), 52--56.Google Scholar
- Familant, M.E. and Detweiler, M.C. 1993. Iconic reference: evolving perspectives and an organizing framework. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies. 39, 5 (Nov. 1993), 705--728. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Federal Aviation Administration 2012. Guidelines for the certification, airworthiness, and operational use of electronic flight bags.Google Scholar
- Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 2014. AC 25-11B - Electronic flight displays.Google Scholar
- Flight testing for aviation's first touch-screen primary flight displays takes off at Rockwell Collins: 2012. http://www.rockwellcollins.com/Data/News/2012. Accessed: 2015-01-20.Google Scholar
- Hamblin C 2003. Electronic Flight Bags (EFBs) with small screens significantly increase information retrieval times. Proceedings of 12th International Symposium on Aviation Psychology (Dayton OH, 2003), 463--468.Google Scholar
- Happian-Smith, J. 2000. An introduction to modern vehicle design.Google Scholar
- Hardyck, C. and Petrinovich, L.F. 1977. Left-handedness. Psychological Bulletin. 87, 3 (1977), 385--404.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Harris, D. 2004. Human factors for civil flight deck design. Gower Publishing, Ltd.Google Scholar
- Honeywell brings modern touch to gulfstream cockpit: 2015. https://aerospace.honeywell.com/news/honeywell-brings-modern-touch-to-gulfstream-cockpit. Accessed: 2015-06-01.Google Scholar
- Huguely, A. 2013. American airlines completes electronic flight bag implementation.Google Scholar
- International Organization for Standardization 2010. ISO 9241-210: Ergonomics of human-centred system interaction - part 210: Human-centred design for interactive systems.Google Scholar
- Jack DHM: 2013. www.plm.automation.siemens.com/en_gb/products/. Accessed: 2016-01-02.Google Scholar
- Johnstone, N. 2013. The electronic flight bag friend or foe? Report Nr 104.Google Scholar
- Jones, D. 1990. Three input concepts crew interaction presented electronic for flight with information on a large-screen cockpit display.Google Scholar
- K. H. Abbott 2001. The Avionics Handbook, Chapter 9: Human factors engineering and flight deck design. CRC press LLC.Google Scholar
- Kaminani, S. 2011. Human computer interaction issues with touch screen interfaces in the flight deck. AIAA/IEEE Digital Avionics Systems Conference - Proceedings (Oct. 2011), 6B4-1--6B4-7.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kim, I. and Jo, J.H. 2015. Performance comparisons between thumb-based and finger-based input on a small touch-screen under realistic variability. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction. 31, 11 (Nov. 2015), 746--760.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lazar, J. et al. 2010. Research methods in human-computer interaction. Wiley. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Malina, R.M. 2004. Secular trends in growth, maturation and physical performance: A review. Anthropological Review. 67, (2004), 3--31.Google Scholar
- Noyes, J.M. and Starr, A.F. 2007. A comparison of speech input and touch screen for executing checklists in an avionics application. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology. 17, 3 (Jun. 2007), 299--315.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Le Pape, M.A. and Vatrapu, R.K. 2009. An experimental study of field dependency in altered Gz environments. Proceedings of the 27th international conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI 09 (New York, 2009), 1255. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Pheasant, S. and Haslegrave, C. 2005. Bodyspace: Anthropometry, ergonomics and the design of work.Google Scholar
- Poirson, E. et al. 2013. Comparative analysis of human modeling tools DHM tools comparison: methodology. 2nd International Digital Human Modeling Symposium. (2013), 1--7.Google Scholar
- Pschierer, C. et al. 2012. From captain Jeppesen's little black book to the iPad and beyond. 2012 IEEE/AIAA 31st Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC) (Oct. 2012), 1A2-1--1A2-11.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rune, S. et al. 2008. Ergonomic assessment method for cockpit layout of civil aircraft x based on virtual design. Proceedings of 26th International Congress of the Aeronautical Sciences (2008).Google Scholar
- Shamo, M.K. et al. 1999. A multi-dimensional evaluation methodology for new cockpit systems. Proceedings of the 10th International Aviation Psychology Symposium (Columbus, 1999).Google Scholar
- Shamo, M.K. et al. 1998. Evaluation of a new cockpit device: The integrated electronic information system. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting. 42, 1 (Oct. 1998), 138--142.Google Scholar
- Shepard, R.N. 1967. Recognition memory for words, sentences, and pictures. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 6, 1 (1967), 156--163.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Shneiderman, B. 1997. Direct manipulation for comprehensible, predictable and controllable user interfaces. Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Intelligent user interfaces - IUI '97 (New York, New York, USA, 1997), 33--39. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Skaves, P. 2011. Electronic flight bag (EFB) policy and guidance. 2011 IEEE/AIAA 30th Digital Avionics Systems Conference (Oct. 2011), 8D1-1--8D1-11.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Statistical summary of commercial jet airplanes accident: 2012. www.boeing.com/news/techissues/pdf/statsum.pdf. Accessed: 2012-10-11.Google Scholar
- Takahashi, T. 2012. Ipad's in the cockpit: evolution or revolution in the sky. SSRN Electronic Journal. (2012).Google Scholar
- Thales unveils avionics 2020 for helicopters: 2014. https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/worldwide/aerospace/press-release/thales-unveils-avionics-2020-helicopters. Accessed: 2014-06-06.Google Scholar
- The icon book: visual symbols for computer systems and documentation: 1994. . Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tinker, M. 1963. Legibility of print. (1963).Google Scholar
- Wiedenbeck, S. 1999. The use of icons and labels in an end user application program: An empirical study of learning and retention. Behaviour & Information Technology. 18, 2 (Jan. 1999), 68--82.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Designing touch-enabled electronic flight bags in SAR helicopter operations
Recommendations
The Effect of Handedness on use of Touch Screen versus Touch Pad
ATACCS '15: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Application and Theory of Automation in Command and Control SystemsProjected growth and increase in airborne traffic may have an influence on flight performance and may increase the workload of flight crew and the future controllers of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) at their ground control stations. One method to ...
Flight Simulation Testbed of Unmanned Helicopter
ISISE '09: Proceedings of the 2009 Second International Symposium on Information Science and EngineeringThis paper designed a flight simulation testbed of unmanned helicopter. This testbed has the advantage of simple structure, easy implement, low cost, convenient movement and so on. It is suitable for various flight test of mini-unmanned helicopter. It ...
An Overview of Paper Documentation Moving to Onboard Information System (OIS) for Commercial Aircraft
HCI International 2020 – Late Breaking Papers: Cognition, Learning and GamesAbstractPaper documentation has been used in the flight deck for a long time on commercial aircraft. Pilots are familiar with tons of manuals to search information during flight to help them perform procedures to ensure safety, efficiency and comfort on ...
Comments