Sunday, February 8, 2015

Shift Work

Shift Work
Shannon D. Gibson
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University – Worldwide
 ASCI 638: Module 5, Activity 5.4
Submitted to the Worldwide Campus
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Degree of
Masters of Aeronautical Science
February 9, 2015
 

            .           Looking at this schedule, I would have several questions as to the needs of the operation and mission. Also not taken into account often by leaders is, what exactly are the suggestions given by those personnel actually working the shifts? More often than not, the answer is right in front of you, all you have to do is simply ask for input. Although the short description relays that they give 24/7 support, 365 days a year, in my experience, some shifts are busier than others. In stating that, the night shift may not need the same amount of people that the day shift needs on station. I would also take into account that some positions could also be on an “on-call” status, for instance a tech to fix any equipment issues. If they are forward deployed to a combat zone, they will never be far from the ground control station, and the sleeping and eating facilities would most likely be close by, if you had two techs assigned to a crew, then possibly one could be on station and one could be on-call and work a day on/day off schedule. Having said this, not everyone in the crew might need to have the same working days and days off. The techs may have one rotation in the crew and the pilots another. Keeping to a “strict” schedule that everyone has the same exact schedule offers no flexibility. Also not annotated in the example is the typical “day-workers”, leadership and administrative support are typically not in a shift, they are usually in a 0700-1600 shift and days off are given on a routine basis or for some, such as a Officer in Charge, they rarely have a day off when forward deployed. However, those don’t seem to be the focus in this example but burnout can happen all the same.

First thing I would do is take away the fourth crew and add those personnel, divided evenly, to the other three crews. Then I would keep them on the same schedule for an entire month. The additional personnel added would then give the ability to give days off to their respective crew. It might even add additional days off and create more flexibility. Hard to forecast this without knowing exactly what qualifications (quals) are mandatory and how many of each qual is needed. Perhaps they could go into a 3 on/1 off schedule. When deployed I have noticed that it isn’t as important to have two days off in a row. Without outside distractors, a person can have more flexibility.

Also note, with a constant month of having the same schedule, the crew members would better be able to conform to a more natural circadian rhythm and daily schedule. For example, working the 23:30-0800 on a constant basis would allow a person to go to the gym at the same time every day, eat at the same times, and sleep at the same times. Rotating this schedule with a week on each would defeat the ability to have normalcy.

 

 

Predator


Predators (RQ-1/MQ-1/MQ-9) are long endurance; medium altitude typically used for reconnaissance and surveillance but can also be armed with AGM-114 Hellfire missiles which allows for armed reconnaissance. This UAS was first flown in 1994 and after successful flight, production started in 1997.  This is a larger UAS with a 49 foot wingspan and a 27 foot length and cruises at 70kts or more.

            Predators are unique in that when fully utilized, it is a complete system of four Predator UAS’s and a ground control station (GCS). When fully supported, the Predator uses upwards of 82 people inclusive of operators (pilots), tech support personnel and sensor operators and ground team. Having a fully integrated team with four aircraft allow missions such as surveillance for 40 hours consecutive up to 25,000ft within 400 miles of the GCS.  The predator can use a direct link for communications or switch to satellite communications when direct link is unavailable.

            When the predator is not fully utilized as a team of four aircraft, it can be down-graded to smaller missions that use only one aircraft. In doing so, the crew of a single aircraft uses two sensor operators and one pilot. If the mission is within line of sight (LOS), then the pilot uses a stick control and the commands are sent over a standard C-Band. When the range is extended beyond lone of sight (BLOS), it uses the Ku-Band Satellite link (Valdes, 2015). Onboard this unmanned aircraft is the L-3 Com satellite data link that receives commands from the ground. The Predator primary satellite link is a dish that spans 20 feet, but can be broken down along with the aircraft itself which breaks up into 6 parts; two avionics and payload bays, wings, propulsion system, landing gear and tail surfaces. The GCS is the largest part and not easily transported, it literally has to be rolled into vehicles large enough to handle the load; the entire system, inclusive of four aircraft, can fit into a C-130 or a C-141. Reassembly after transport takes approximately eight hours by a minimum of four people. 

            A disadvantage of this system is to transport it, you would need large trucks, or a flatbed truck to fit all components, and then need access to a large aircraft. Taking it to the area which calls for the specific requirement of the Predator can also offer some logistical concerns. Thankfully a C-130 is known for its ability for short take-offs and landings, making it well suited for this UAS. I do believe the designers have done the best job they could have for making such a large UAS with the ability to break it down. I am a bit surprised however at the number of 82 for a full blown mission involving 4 aircraft.



 

References

Valdes, R. How the Predator UAV Works. How Stuff Works. Retrieved Februrary 8, 2015 from:               http://science.howstuffworks.com/predator6.htmValdes,

Saturday, February 7, 2015

NextGen


Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) is the upgraded system to WWII aviation technology to support separation of traffic in our National Airspace System (NAS). This initiative is divided up into three segments since its formation in the early 2000; short-term (2004-1012), mid-term(2012-2020) and long-term(2020-2030 and beyond).  Although the implementation and maintenance will cost approximately $37 billion dollars estimated through the year 2030, they also tote that it will save $106 billion total. Significant benefits are expected after the total implementation inclusive of; fuel savings, reduction in emissions, reduced separation minimums, reduced congestion, better communications across the NAS, standardized access to weather information and updates and improved onboard technology (Houston, nd).

            NextGen will use Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast (ADS-B), which will provide a more reliable and accurate system than we current use. This system provides us with data of any particular aircraft including speed, route, accurate location and the ability to share it with other aircrafts and ground stations by using satellite radio signals. For the aircraft itself, there are upgraded low-visibility operations with the use of a Heads-Up Display (HUDs). Although HUDs are not new, this system will use it in conjunction with the Ground Based Augmentation System Landing System III and the Enhanced Flight Vision System (EFVS) which will allow previously aircraft that couldn’t land in low-vis, the ability to automatically land in these conditions.

     UAS tech experts have already designed a transponder that will integrate with ADS-B and will eventually allow UAS’s to integrate in the NAS, satisfying the FAA mandate of transponder equipped aircraft. Although a relatively small transponder can be installed on the majority of aircrafts, it doesn’t completely eradicate all issues. For instance, the transponder allows us to see the exact location of a UAS, but doesn’t give us further information such as intentions. So if a lost link occurs with a UAS, it is still up to the operator to talk to the air traffic controller if there isn’t a predetermined plan. Right now, a new flight planning system is being developed to take on the extra air traffic that will be eventually added to the NAS. Inclusive of that flight planning will be lost link procedures.

     Currently, the FAA is behind on the implementation of NextGen, and even more behind on the implementation of procedures and mandates concerning the integration of UAS’s with live traffic in our NAS. I do believe the technology is there, but funding and a total collaboration by both the FAA, other government agencies and the public will need to happen before anyone can proceed proceed.

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

Houston, S. NextGen in a Nutshell. The History and Highlights of the Next Generation Air          Traffic Control System. Retrieved February 7, 2015 from                  http://aviation.about.com/od/ATC-Technology/p/What-Is-Nextgen.htm.

NextGen UAS Transponders. ADS-B ONE. Retrieved February 7, 2015 from                http://www.nextgenuastransponders.com/