Advanced Vision Systems Technology Demonstration Programme

1
Increasing The RelevanceOf AVS Within The NAS9
January 2007
Nominated for Flight Internationals Aerospace
Industry Awards 2005 for EVS
2
CMC shares similar expectations than FAA(1) on
evolution of Advanced Vision Systems
(1) Presentation by Mr. Les Smith on 19 October
2006 at NBAA 2006 in Orlando, FL
3
Key benefits of EFVS

• Increases situational awareness of pilots in
  difficult operating conditions, often at
  unfamiliar airports
• Enhanced vision of approach lights and visual
  references of the runway and its surroundings
• Safer ground ops at night low visibility
  conditions

(1) Other than CAT II or CAT III approaches
4
Key benefits of EFVS (continued)

• Increases situational awareness of pilots in
  difficult operating conditions, often at
  unfamiliar airports
• Allows straight-in instrument approaches below DA
  to 100ft Height Above Touchdown (HAT) using EFVS
  only(1)
• Allows landings in most 1,200 ft RVR conditions
• ILS approaches, FMS (LNAV / VNAV) non-precision
  approaches

(1) Not for CAT II or CAT III approaches. EFVS
regulated through FAR 91.175(l)(m) and FAA
Advisory Circular AC 90-EFVS.
5
Key benefits of EFVS (continued)

• Increases situational awareness of pilots in
  difficult operating conditions, often at
  unfamiliar airports
• Allows straight-in instrument approaches below DA
  to 100ft Height Above Touchdown (HAT) using EFVS
  only(1)
• Allows landings in most 1,200 ft RVR conditions
• ILS approaches, FMS (LNAV / VNAV) non-precision
  approaches
• National Airspace changing publication of
  hundreds of WAAS / SBAS LPV approaches
• EFVS a good complement to lower minima from 200
  ft (WAAS LPV) to 100 ft with recognition of
  approach lights

(1) Not for CAT II or CAT III approaches. EFVS
regulated through FAR 91.175(l)(m) and FAA
Advisory Circular AC 90-EFVS.
6
BEVS Live approach to Eagle, CO
EVS ON
EVS OFF
Image recorded from the HUD
Image taken through the HUD
Images courtesy of Bombardier Aerospace
7
EFVS - Expectations

• EXPECTATIONS
• In order of priority, operators expect better
  visibility through
• Fog
• Nighttime (clear weather)
• Snow
• Rain
• Clouds

• Evaluated Performance
• What should operators expect from IR systems
• Poor to Excellent
• Excellent
• Excellent
• Poor to Moderate
• Poor

8
Improving light detection within existing hardware

• In all conditions
• Blooming and saturation is alleviated
• Where appropriate, display of lights is enhanced
• Brightness and contrast is further optimized

Before
All of this within the confines of existing
hardware
9
Applying other algorithms to further enhance
lights and scene content
10
Applying similar algorithms to outdoor scenery
11
Increasing The RelevanceOf AVS Within The NAS9
January 2007

• Evaluating the impact of LED approach lights

12
LED approach lights can put existing EFVS at risk

• Context
• LED approach lights being considered by FAA
• Looking for reduction in operating cost at
  airports
• IR emissions better suited for weather
  penetration than visible light
• Foundation of current EFVS certified for lower
  minima
• LED wavelength undetectable by current EFVS IR
  sensors if emission only in visible spectrum
• In addition, LED in visible spectrum only
  requires supplemental mean to prevent mist, snow
  from impacting effectiveness

13
LED approach lights can put existing EFVS at risk
(continued)

• Practical considerations
• Installed base of cooled IR EFVS growing rapidly
• Over 300 systems installed to date
• EFVSs installed base to grow by gt 100 aircraft
  per year
• Bombardiers Globals and Gulfstreams
  G450/500/550 already account for an increase of
  more than 85 aircraft per year
• FedEx field retrofit to encompass several hundred
  aircraft

14
In response, FAA must assess IR requirements for
approach lights

• Several tests conducted by FAA to assess spectral
  irradiance of PAR-38 lights
• Stated objective identify near IR requirement
  for LED lamps that would be visible to current
  EFVS
• Tests conducted at Optronics Corporation in
  Orlando, FL
• Gathered data on 60w and 150w PAR-38 lamps, as
  well as on LIC LED PAR-38 lamps
• Region of interest 0.75 2.5 µm
• Requested CMCs assistance in defining spectral
  irradiance requirements
• OEMs should also be petitioned as this could have
  a large impact on their current EFVS customer base

15
Cooled EFVS IR sensors fielded today perform best
at a wavelength of 5µm
Peak sensitivity for current dual band IR sensors
16
IR LED could provide effective compromise between
operating costs and airport access
200W approach lights Generate 11W radiated power
at an effective wavelength of 2.6µm
Emission effective wavelength of approach lights
LEDs 2 times as efficient as Incadescent bulbs
require less than half the power for equivalent
Lumen output
Relative IR sensitivity of Focal Plane Array
At 5µm, LED would require 6W to be as effective
with current EFVS sensors as a 200W approach light
17
Increasing The RelevanceOf AVS Within The NAS9
January 2007

• Summary

18
Continuing improvements of EFVS are relevant to
the expansion of NAS

• Efforts to increase effectiveness of EFVS IR
  sensors benefit expansion of NAS
• Continued improvement in situational awareness
  increase safety and confidence of crews
• Improved fog penetration increase mission success
  rate, use of alternative airports to main hubs
• FAA must ensure that gains from EFVS not
  sacrificed in favor of lower airport operating
  costs
• Include IR signature requirements for LED
  approach lights
• Gains at airports more than offset by ensuring
  efficient and increased airport access, as
  provided by EFVS

19
Questions and Discussion