Aircraft Status Supervision System Concept
Publication: Journal of Aerospace Engineering
Volume 30, Issue 5
Abstract
A system for supervision of aircraft status was developed, modeled and simulated. The system assesses overall aircraft status based on data available from external (out-of-aircraft) and internal (aircraft systems and crew) sources. The paper describes system requirements, functions, and architecture. It includes an example of an application. The aircraft and its systems status are assessed using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method, structured in a multicriteria architecture, which takes into account both quantitative and qualitative factors. To illustrate the proposed approach, a sample aircraft supervision system is developed to prove AHP applicability and to illustrate how this method could be implemented. To check aircraft sensor data, the proposed methodology uses the aircraft flight mechanic model. The developed supervision system shows the aircraft/systems status in a clear, quantitative way.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
The paper was prepared within the project Advanced Cockpit for Reduction Of Stress and Workload (ACROSS) funding from the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme FP7/2012-2016 under grant agreement ACP2-GA-2012-314501.
References
Abdi, M., and Labib, A. (2003). “A design strategy for reconfigurable manufacturing systems (RMSs) using analytical hierarchical process (AHP): A case study.” Int. J. Prod. Res., 41(10), 2273–2299.
Cacciabue, P. C. (2007). Modeling driver behavior in automotive environments: Critical issues in driver interactions with intelligent transport systems, Springer, London.
Callantine, T. J. (2000). “A glass cockpit crew activity analysis tool.”, Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA.
Chen, J., and Zhang, X. (2012). “Decision model of flight safety based on flight event.” Physics Procedia, 33, 462–469.
Cheng, C. (1997). “Evaluating naval tactical missile systems by fuzzy AHP based on the grade value of membership function.” Eur. J. Oper. Res., 96(2), 343–350.
Cheng, C., Yang, K., and Hwang, C. (1999). “Evaluating attack helicopters by AHP based on linguistic variable weight.” Eur. J. Oper. Res., 116(2), 423–435.
Frikha, A., and Moalla, H. (2015). “Analytic hierarchy process for multi-sensor data fusion based on belief theory.” Eur. J. Oper. Res., 241(1), 133–147.
Hahn, D. (2007). The analytic hierarchy process, The International Council on Systems Engineering, San Diego.
MATLAB [Computer software]. MathWorks, Natick, MA.
Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process, McGraw Hill International, New York.
Sanchez-Lozano, J., Serna, J., and Dolon-Payan, A. (2015). “Evaluating military training aircrafts through the combination of multi-criteria decision making processes with fuzzy logic. A case study in the Spanish Air Force Academy.” Aerosp. Sci. Technol., 42, 58–65.
Wang, J., Huang, D., Su, Y., and Wang, W. (2008). “Aeroengine health assessment using a web-based grey analytic hierarchy process.” Computer Science and Software Engineering, IEEE, New York, 411–414.
Wang, L., Sun, R., and Yang, Z. (2009). “Analysis and evaluation of human factors in aviation maintenance based on fuzzy and AHP method.” Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, IEEE, New York, 876–880.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Aerospace Engineering
Volume 30 • Issue 5 • September 2017
Copyright
©2017 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Aug 4, 2016
Accepted: Apr 3, 2017
Published online: Jun 30, 2017
Published in print: Sep 1, 2017
Discussion open until: Nov 30, 2017
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.