Dual Head-Up Guidance System (HGS) on Embraer 190/195

1. Dual Head-Up Guidance System (HGS) on Embraer 190/195

2. Courtesy of

3. Historic Background Landing Point Designator (Lunar Module) • High Level Control of vehicle´s trajectory • High Level & Effective Descision Making Input • Pilot supported by Computer and Avionics • Ideal allocation of tasks: Pilot: Assessing Monitoring Deciding Back-Up for Automation Machine: Precise Thrust Control Data Computations Warnings and Alerts           

4. Historic Background Landing Point Designator (Lunar Module) Formed the core of man-machine system Enabled Pilot to remain the active controller   Highest Level of Man – Machine Integration

5. Decision for Dual HGS on the Embraer 190/195 family Head-Up Display Formes the core of man-machine system Enables Pilot to remain the active controller   Higher Level of Man – Machine Integration

6. Flight Safety and Operational Benefits Risk Assessment Will a flight be safer when using HGS ?

7. Autoland HGS CAT III CAT III Flight Safety and Operational Benefits Risk Assessment Where did we start with HGS ? What are the risks?

8. Flight Safety and Operational Benefits Data       Only approx. 2% of all landings with Autoland During > 97% of all approaches no Safety Benefits with Autoland Autoland Systems limited for straight and standard ILS/MLS Approaches Autoland not capable for PBN/RNP Approaches, (design & certification) HUD Safety Benefits during 100% of all flights from Takeoff until Landing Cat IIIa Autoland only used in approach and for landing HGS can be used in all phases of flight Traffic, WX Approach, Landing, Taxi T/O Taxi

9. Flight Safety and Operational Benefits Design Speed Error Tape Flight Path Symbol Acceleration Caret ΣF = m x a E = ½ m v² Precise Energy - Management Indication

10. Flight Safety and Operational Benefits Design    Instantaneous Indication auf Brake / Autobrake Performance Immediate Decision Tool Reduced Risk of Runway Overrun /Excursion RWY 2500 LO MED HI

11. Flight Safety and Operational Benefits Data   Improved Touch Down Performance Improved Landing Footprint CRJ MUC RWY 08R No HGS With HGS

12. Flight Safety and Operational Benefits Analysis No Transition Head-Down to Head –Up at DA(H Reduce Minima by replacing or supplementing approach and runway lighting Improved Single Engine Operation in T/O Weather Avoidance Superior Steep Turns / Stall Recovery Flight Path Reference – Visual Approaches Better Energy Management During Rejected Takeoffs (RTO) EVS / Synthetic Vision Intuitive Upset Recovery Head-Up Flight Operations Full Time Providing Greater Situational and Operational Awareness Superior Precision Control and Energy Management in all Regimes of Flight Low Visibility Takeoff on Type II and Type III localizers Category II/III Approaches Rollout Guidance for AIII mode Reduced ILS Interference RNP / GLS / PBN / LPV Approaches Runway Remaining Deceleration Rate Index Tailstrike Advisory Smoother TCAS Corrective Guidance A/LCapability

13. Flight Safety and Operational Benefits Analysis Results Autoland CAT III HGS CAT III

14. Flight Safety and Operational Benefits Risks     Do Pilots become HGS criples? Will they maintain PFD or Head down skills ? Flying against the sun? Flying at night ?

15. Flight Safety and Operational Benefits Analysis HGS Symbology compatible with PFD  Flight Path Vector Flight Path Angle

16. Flight Safety and Operational Benefits 4 HGS Proficiency Levels     Level 1 : Initial Introduction Tunnelling, Fixation, Adaptation (can be reduced using FTD) Level 2 : Secondary Awareness Prioritizing the information acquisition (FFS Phase) Level 3 : A World beyond the combiner Integration HGS into conformal world and combining other cockpit information Level 4 : The HUD as another flight Deck Tool / HGS as the Primary Flight Display Reference Final Stage of proficiency, symbology becomes second nature Pilot becomes more aware of air mass effect and performance (Aircraft)

17. Flight Safety and Operational Benefits Analysis Results Threat RISK = Defence Measures

18. Flight Safety and Operational Benefits Analysis Results Mindell´s Law*) : The system is: human(s) + machine Optimize the system, not the machine

19. Flight Safety and Operational Benefits Analysis Results • Conclusions of Report September 2009 • HGS would have likely or highly likely prevented the following • percentage of a accidents • 38% of all the accidents/incidents • 69% of Takeoff and Landing Accidents • 57% of Loss-of-Control Accidents • 33% of Miscellaneous Accidents • 19% of Propulsion Accidents • 3% of Undercarriage related accidents • The most influential individual HGS safety properties were: • Flight Path Vector • Flight Path Acceleration • Speed Error Tape  

20. Flight Safety and Operational Benefits Analysis Results Why are dual HUDs standard on the B 787 Dreamliner ? • Principal argument: “Standard equipment dual HUDs will save at least one aircraft over the life of the program” • 90% of customers wanted dual HUDs but Boeing assumed only 10 to 20% would select the option • Limited “hard” payback on autoland equipped aircraft • Most airlines have difficulty quantifying safety benefit  

21. Flight Safety and Operational Benefits Analysis Results Increased Situation Awareness for both pilots Conformal Flight Path Vector with HUD compatible to HDD Real Time Aircraft Energy Monitoring and improved assessment of deviations Increased Landing Accuracy (Landing Footprint) Reduced Risk of Hard Landings / Tailstrike Visual Indication of Brake Performance and Remaining Runway Improved Decision Making Tool during Takeoff, Approach and Landing Intuitive Guidance during abnormal situations, e.g. Unusual Attitude, Engine failure        

22. Flight Safety and Operational Benefits Risk Assessment Will a flight be safer when using HGS ? Yes !

23. Flight Safety and Operational Benefits Analysis Results Both Pilots need the same level of information Both pilots need to have the same tools for HGS benefits Both pilots are active controllers !    Decision: Dual Independant HGS Installation

24. Flight Safety and Operational Benefits Operational Aspects        Reduced Minimas with HUD (EU OPS: Lower than CAT I/II minimas) PBN / RNP Capability - Operational Benefits with EGNOS starting end of 2009 PBN / RNP Takeoff and Go-around GBAS / LPV approaches evolving October 2009: FAA CAT I : 1400 ft / DH 150 ft CAT IIIb Capability (FAA) All Approaches using the same operational procedures

25. Flight Safety and Operational Benefits Operational Benefits Will a flight be more economical with HGS ? Yes !

26. HGS Operation Operating Philosophy        HGS will be used during all phases of flight All Approaches will use the same SOPs. Flight Path - Energy Flying Pitch - Power Use of an appropriate Level of Automation is a StandardProcedure Manual Flying while using Autothrottle Practicing Manual Flying Skills is encouraged ( Pilots to keep proficient with basic flying skills) First Officers qualified to conduct CAT III Approaches (2011)

27. HGS Operation Achievements      CAT III Operational Approval after 6 weeks of Operation GPS Approaches - RNP ready Steep Approach Approval into London City Airport (5,5°) E190 only All Non Precision Approaches flown as CDA - like an ILS Flight Path Controlled Landing Technique

28. Training Training Outline & Requirements   Competency-Based Training and Assessment DOC 9868 New setup of Training to include FTD and FFS

29. Training Training Outline & Requirements        JetBlue First Dual HGS Operator on E 190 in 2006 Advanced Training and Qualification Program on A320 and E190 HGS Training from Day 1 CBT Home Study Phase Use of FTD and FFS Solution Based Training Task Allocation

30. Training Training Outline & Requirements     Basic CAT III Training in FTD System Knowledge using FTD Integrating HGS Training Procedure Training

31. Training Training Outline & Requirements         Criterias as per JAR FCL Elimination of Memory Items and use of QRC Extended Training for unreliable airspeed and altitude Flying with STBY Instruments only Double Engine Failure CAT III Operation with Single Engine Operation Emergency Descend with pilot´s incapacitation Special Training Event without the use of a QRH

32. Future Developements Growth Capability  Technical Feasibility vs. Economy Synthetic Vision System Enhanced Vision System

33. Future Developements Growth Capability   Takeoff Safety Enhancement: Thrust = F = m xa Precise Tool for Abort Decision Insufficient Thrust:

34. Future Developements Growth Capability   Takeoff and Landing Safety Enhancement: Remaining Runway Alert Precise Tool for Landing Abort Decision

35. Future Developments Research     M.I.T Center for Automation, Robotics & Society MIT International Center for Air Transportation Evaluation & Verification of Training Programs with Studies and Future Concepts

36. Thank You ! The Journey has started