UUnniivveerrssiittyy ooff TTeennnneesssseeee,, KKnnooxxvviillllee TTRRAACCEE:: TTeennnneesssseeee RReesseeaarrcchh aanndd CCrreeaattiivvee EExxcchhaannggee Masters Theses Graduate School 5-2004 UUnniiqquuee AAssppeeccttss ooff UUnnmmaannnneedd AAeerriiaall VVeehhiiccllee TTeessttiinngg Mark David Lower University of Tennessee - Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Part of the Aerospace Engineering Commons RReeccoommmmeennddeedd CCiittaattiioonn Lower, Mark David, "Unique Aspects of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Testing. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 2004. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/2329 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Mark David Lower entitled "Unique Aspects of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Testing." I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science, with a major in Aviation Systems. Robert Richards, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Dr. Peter Solies, Dr. Alfonso Pujol Jr Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official student records.) To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Mark David Lower entitled “Unique Aspects of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Testing”. I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science, with a major in Aviation Systems. Professor Robert Richards Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: __D__r._ P__et_e_r_ S_o_l_ie_s_ ______________ ___D__r._ _A_l_f_o_n_s_o_ _P_u__jo_l_,_ J_r_._ ___________ Acceptance for the Council: Anne Mayhew _______________________ Vice Chancellor and Dean of Graduate Studies (Original signatures are on file with official student records) UNIQUE ASPECTS OF UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE TESTING A Thesis Presented for the Master of Science Degree The University of Tennessee, Knoxville Mark David Lower May 2004 DEDICATION This thesis is dedicated to my wife, Diane. Without her patience, trust, and dedication to our children, I could never have spent seventeen years in a career that has required such constant and extensive travel. To those children, David, Candace, and Michelle. Despite their father’s frequent absence they are becoming such wonderful and reliable young adults that I never need to worry whether they will do the right things while I am away. And finally to my parents, Terry and Carolyn Lower, who always accepted what I chose to do with my life, but always inspired me to reach higher. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank those who have helped me along the way to completing my Master of Science degree in Aviation Systems. Thanks to Mr. Bob Richards, my committee chairman and United States Naval Test Pilot School (USNTPS) academic instructor, for his time and effort in helping me through this final phase, and the ability to drill complex concepts in to my brain. I would also like to thank the many other Navy and civilian instructors at the USNTPS for their dedication and outstanding efforts in getting me through the systems syllabus. Since this paper is based largely on the experiences gained over many years of Unmanned Air Vehicle (UAV) flight testing, I would like to thank Mr. Kerry Kelley, my first supervisor and mentor at the Naval Air Test Center. Mr. Kelley was instrumental in getting a UAV flight test engineer in to the USNTPS. Without his support and lobbying skills, I never could have lived that dream. Along with Lieutenant Colonel Frank Crilley (USMC RET), Kerry also taught me much about the political side of flight test and how to get things done. Finally, thanks to all of the engineers, technicians, Sailors, and Marines I have had the pleasure to work with over the years. All of the on-the-job training has been greatly appreciated. iii ABSTRACT The purpose of this paper is to examine the applicability of established manned aircraft test techniques and processes to the testing of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs). While the paper is largely focused on the Naval Aviation perspective, input from several joint programs as well as some Air Force and Army testing is included. In addition, although handled differently, the testing of the Tomahawk Cruise Missile is also considered. Processes associated with test planning, risk mitigation and airworthiness are considered in some detail. Much of this document is drawn from UAV flight test experience compiled in a draft Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development (AGARD) paper for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) paper by the author. Given the enormous range in size, speed, and complexity of UAV systems examined, it is not surprising to find that numerous conclusions can be drawn. This paper attempts to categorize both the air vehicles and their associated systems to facilitate the analysis. There are many standard flight test techniques that can easily be applied to UAV systems with excellent results. The same is true of many of the processes associated with flight test planning and execution. However, it is also evident that it is beneficial and in many cases necessary to adapt, or tailor, both the techniques and the processes to efficiently test a given system. A prime example of modifying test techniques is evident with many of the smaller systems that cannot support the type of instrumentation normally associated with manned aircraft flight test. Similarly, with respect to processes, airworthiness requirements often need to be tailored in consideration of the actual risk, cost, capability and benefit provided by the system. By definition, testing of an unmanned vehicle presents no risk to the pilot/operator. If control by fail- safe, or flight termination device can eliminate risk to property, the robustness of the design can be far below what may be considered acceptable for a manned aircraft, without creating significant safety issues. Recommendations include process improvements to permit UAV programs to evolve without excessive restrictions based on manned aircraft requirements. These processes should be based on system’s characteristics and an assessment of the risks associated with the test and mission constraints of the system. Adaptation of evolving technology may be used to further refine and improve existing flight test techniques for UAV systems. Further research is recommended in the form of a statistical study of total UAV and cruise missile flight test mishaps, fatalities, and property damage as a function of total flight hours to validate the risk level and support process improvement. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………1 Air Vehicle Categories …………………………………………………1 Micro ……………………………………………………………1 Small ……………………………………………………………1 Tactical ………………………………………………………….1 Medium Altitude and Endurance (MAE) ………………………2 High Altitude and Endurance (HAE) ……………………………2 Flight Control Categories …………………………………………….2 Rate Control ……………………………………………………2 Stability Augmentation or Autopilot Control ……………………3 Fully Autonomous Operations …………………………………3 1 RISK MANAGEMENT ……………………………………………………4 Airworthiness …………………………………………………………4 Configuration Control ………………………………………………5 Range Clearance …………………………………………………….6 Critical System Redundancy ………………………………….6 Air Vehicle Size, Weight, and Speed …………………………7 Fail-Safe, or Flight Termination System …………………….7 Test Planning ……………………………………………………….9 Test Hazard Analysis …………………………………………..9 Test Specific Emergency Procedures ..……………………….10 The Safety Checklist .………………………………………..13 2 GROUND TESTING ……………………………………………………14 Modeling and Simulation ………………………………………….14 System Integration Test (SIT) …………………………………….14 Data Link and Control Transfer …………………………………15 BIT and Auto-Test ……………………………………………….17 Power Plant ………………………………………………………..17 Attitude and Navigation Control Ground Testing ……………….19 Electro-Magnetic Effects …………………………………………..22 Weight and Balance ……………………………………………….24 3 FLIGHT TESTING ………………………………………………………25 Pilots or Operators ………………………………………………….25 Methods of Control …………………………………………….25 Qualifications ………………………………………………….26 Feedback ……………………………………………………….27 v TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page 3 FLIGHT TESTING (continued)…………………………………………24 Command and Control ……………………………………………27 Ground Control Station ……………………………………….28 Ground Data Terminal ……………………………………….30 Air Data Terminal ……………………………………………30 Antenna Systems ……………………………………….30 Latency ……...………….…………………………………31 Instrumentation ………………………………………………………32 Air Vehicle Flying Qualities ……………………………………….32 Air Vehicle Performance …………………………………………….33 System Flight Testing ……………………………………………….34 Electro-Optical (EO)/Forward Looking Infra-Red (FLIR) ……34 Communications Relay…………….……………………..……..35 Jammers ….……………………………………………………..35 Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Detectors (NBC) ……….36 Emulation …………………………………………………….36 Lethal Payloads ………………………………………………36 Launch and Recovery Systems ………………………………36 Operational Testing ………………………………………………….37 Interoperability …………………………………………………38 4 A CRUISE MISSILE PERSPECTIVE …………………………………39 Background ………………………………………………………….39 Organization ………………………………………………………..39 Test Operations ……………………………………………………40 Test Planning ………………………………………………………41 Turnover Brief …………………………………………………41 Working Group Meeting (WGM) ……………………………..41 Test Planning Meeting (TPM) ………………………………….42 Mission Readiness Review (MRR) ……………………………...42 Mission Control Panel (MCP) ………………………………….42 Summary ……………………………………………………………..42 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ………………………44 Conclusions …………………………………………………………44 Risk Management ……………………………………………44 Ground Testing ………………………………………………44 vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (continued) ………44 Instrumentation ……………………………………………….44 System Testing ………………………………………………….44 Organization …………………………………………………44 Pilots ……………………………………………………………44 Recommendations …………………………………………………45 Risk Management ……………………………………………45 Ground Testing ………………………………………………..45 Instrumentation ………………………………………………45 Organizational Structure ………………………………………..45 Pilots ………………………………………………………….45 REFERENCES ………..……………………………………………………………46 APPENDICES …………………………………………………………………….48 APPENDIX A EMC SAFETY OF FLIGHT TEST PROCEDURE …49 APPENDIX B COOPER-HARPER RATING SCALES …………52 APPENDIX C BEDFORD WORKLOAD SCALE …………55 APPENDIX D EXCERPTS FROM SA-5R-92: …………………57 FLYING QUALITIES AND PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF THE BQM-147A WITH A SIMULATED COMMUNICATIONS JAMMER APPENDIX E STANAG 4586 HUMAN FACTORS EXCERPTS 78 APPENDIX F TOMAHAWK REMOTE COMMAND ………...93 AND CONTROL SYSTEM DESCRIPTION Vita …….. ……..….………………………………………………………………111 vii