MQ-9 Reaper GCS Analysis

Functional Operation Analysis

The Ground Control Station Functional Operation subject I have chosen to perform my analysis is on the MQ-9 Reaper. The Reaper is an extended mission UAS which performs mission such as Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR), support, and weapons strike thru the use of its mounted missiles or bombs payload. The Reaper’s precision weapons inventory are described as “Air-to-Ground Missile (AGM)-114 Hellfire missiles which provide highly accurate, low collateral damage” (Air Force, 2015).

An analysis made of the ground control station functional operation of the MQ-9 Reaper displays 14 monitors surrounding the pilot in control (PIC) or operator and the co-pilot or sensors operator. The monitor displays are arranged directly in front view of the operators and to the left of the pilot and to the right of the sensors operator. Measurements of the displays range in sizes from 10-inch to 17-inch screen sizes. The pilot and sensor controller also utilize right and left hand control sticks which control the flight of the UAS, control the UAS camera, throttle output, and weapons sensor and tracking functions. The layout of the control station mimics that of a television video engineers control desk and can be viewed in the video offering provided in the references section below produced by NOVA titled Rise of The Drones at 9:25 time video sequence.

Negative Human Factors

Two negative human factors I observed with the functional operation of the ground control station of the MQ-9 would be the multiple number of displays surrounding both the pilot in control and sensors operator, and also the use of dual control sticks (one for each hand). The problem associated with multiple-display monitors as shown in Figure A, is that peripheral vision is limited especially when conditions are not favorable, according to Johnston, Ruthruff and Lien “under favorable conditions—high-contrast stimuli and high event rate—people can successfully monitor peripheral displays for new events while carrying out an unrelated continuous task on an adjacent display” (Johnston, et al., 2015, p.1). Furthermore, a pilot has to discern many other systems while performing flight operation of a UAS which further places limits on the human brain processing ability as stated by Johnston et al., (2015) “the cognitive architecture of the human operators is essentially fixed, and its information-processing capability is severely limited” (Johnston, et al., 2015, p.1).

 Figure1. MQ-9 Reaper Ground Control Station. Both the Pilot/operator (left-side) and the Sensors operator (right-side) employ the use of multiple monitors and hand stick controls in order to operate the Reaper UAS. MQ-9 Reaper. (2012, October 15). Six MQ-9 Reaper, Four MQ-1 Predator Drone Flying Simultaneously, Set New World Record. The Aviationist. Reprinted from https://theaviationist.com/tag/mq-9-reaper

A way to address this human factor situation is by reducing the number of displays utilized in the control station. The introduction of a large widescreen or monitor viewing option extending from left to right which is also ocularly conducive to the human eye and enhanced with an interactive choice options which can be controlled from both the UAS pilot and sensor operator’s seat. A video produced by Zhang further support the effect of the round screen as opposed to the flat screen. Zhang states “curved screens will make the screen feel bigger than it actually is under an ideal situation the curved screen will cover a wider field of view” (Zhang, 2016, 1:28).

The use of one control stick as opposed to one in each hand is another human factor issue which could be improved upon in the MQ-9 control station. The video offering display both the pilot in control and the sensor controller with a controller for either hand as well as a control stick with multi-option built into the assembly.

Such a design could present the possibility of accidental mishaps occurring as displayed in the Rise of the Drones video (Nova, 2013, 23:35), when the pilot in control fired the laser guided weapon without communicating with the sensor operator to engage the sensor tracker.

The use of the sidestick promotes a greater awareness for the gages around the cockpit as stated by Orlady in regards to a center mounted control in comparison to a side mounted control “An eye position that is too low can also mean that the control wheel (or yoke) obscures some of the instrument displays, Obviously, this is not a problem with an airplane controlled by a side stick” (Orlady & Lauber, 1999, p.18).

The multiple controls on the control stick could further promote “mode confusion” as stated by Damilano, Guglieri, Quagliotti, and Sale, (2012) “mode awareness/confusion is characterized by a misunderstanding of the current active mode or a lack of comprehension of the automation in a certain mode. In both cases the operator could do an inappropriate request to the system” (Damilano et al., 2012, p.33).

The two offerings for addressing the human factor issues described above could be used as a possibility for improvement of the MQ-9 Reaper UAS. When compared to the manned platform the similarities would encompass the plethora of gages also found in the cockpit. Maurino and Salas (2010) state in regards to the design of the manned platform and pilot attention “display design should not neglect the fact that pilots must also be able to divide their attention between multiple sources of information to maintain overall system stability” (Maurino & Salas, 2010, p. 444).  Although the gages are necessary for flight, the possibility of re-analyzing the cockpit of the manned platform could be considered. There are other human factors not mentioned in this brief research, which could further promote improvements made across other unmanned platforms. 

References

Damilano, L., Guglieri, G., Quagliotti, F., & Sale, I. (2012). FMS for unmanned aerial systems: HMI issues and new interface solutions. Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems, 65(1-4), 27-42.       doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/10.1007/s10846-011-9567-3

Johnston, J. C., Ruthruff, E., & Lien, M. (2015). Visual information processing from multiple

displays. Human Factors: The Journal of Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 57(2), 276-297.

doi:10.1177/0018720814545974

Maurino, D. E., Salas, E., & ebrary, I. (2010). Human factors in aviation, pp. 444. (Second; 2nd; 2;

ed.). Amsterdam; Boston;: Academic Press/Elsevier.

Orlady, H. W., Orlady, L. M., & Lauber, J. K. (1999). Human factors in multi-crew flight operations.

Brookfield, Vt; Aldershot, England; Ashgate.

Rise of the Drones. (NOVA, 2013). Full Documentary. Retrieved from        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikuu2VU2WCk

U.S. Air Force. (2015). MQ-9 Reaper. About Us,

Retrieved from http://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104470/mq-9-reaper/

Zhang, D. (2016. October, 27). Are Curved Monitors Worth It? YouTube, Retrieved from             https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3aK0k2Is6Q