F-35 Auto-GCAS Team to Receive 2018 Collier Trophy

Discuss the F-35 Lightning II
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2614
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post31 May 2019, 04:14

“Is this too new to even ask about and TBD?”

I am unfamiliar with details of the sw implementation, but I don’t think it’s even installed in operational jets yet.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5917
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post31 May 2019, 06:08

outlaw162 wrote:It still amazes me that people think the primary purpose of this engineering miracle is to save lives.

It's a side bar compared to saving a $100,000,000 aircraft. Pilots are a dime a dozen....good ones maybe 20 cents/dozen. Pilots would fly the machines with or without auto-GCAS....consistently good pilots generally would not need saving.

Realistically, the crux of the matter here is that the folks in command positions want to avoid fatal class 'A's to keep their commands, and as well, the folks paying for the machines want something pilot-proof.



The pilot I talked to was the opposite. He said all the old school guys (command) want to fly the airplane, and the young pilots having grown up with technology are more of the "theres an 'app' for that right?"

YMMV
Choose Crews
Offline

outlaw162

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1282
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2008, 02:33

Unread post31 May 2019, 16:58

Yes, and nowhere is that attitude more prevalent than the airline business.

Maybe it's a good thing, maybe not. The 2 MAX crashes are pretty good examples of 'systems designed to make things safer by taking the pilot out of the loop' gone awry.

Had a young airline guy in the right seat as a test subject doing fairly complicated RNAV arrivals in an A-330 sim. We alternated PF on each run. On one run I clicked off the auto-pilot to hand fly. With all seriousness, he commented, "I get nervous when people do that." Sign of the times.

Except for the AOA limiter on the F-16, every mil aircraft I flew would have allowed me to get myself in as much trouble as I could dream up. The only thing between me and disaster was me.

So once again, maybe it's a good thing as far as preserving both assets....ejections generally only preserved the 7 mil asset, not the 100 mil one....but it could also be a step in the career path to commissary officer for some pilots. If I had to take control of the aircraft from the checkee on a checkride, trainers, fighters or heavies, it was a bust. This has parallels to that.

(Wasn't 'psychometrics' the movie with Janet Leigh in the shower? :shock: )
Offline
User avatar

Gums

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2275
  • Joined: 16 Dec 2003, 17:26

Unread post31 May 2019, 18:45

Salute!

Thanks, outlaw!

There's a situation for Hal to "suggest" something, and there might be a situation when Hal says, " Dave, I can't let you do that".

The problem with the GCAS and other "protections" is when the pilot atually knows better than Hal !!!!

E.G. I am dropping down to strafe in my Warthog, and I have done the same profile a thousand times when Hal decides I am gonna kill myself. And him! But his brain is in the cloud someplace and ready to take over in another system. I miss the bad guys and my grunt friends are toast.

The AF447 episode is more relevant than the current 737 fiasco. I have been a frequent poster on the latest, and my view from the fighter community has been accepted for the most part. AF447 was a different problem, and the 'bus "protections" had a fault that the accident clearly showed. As with the Viper, "you can't stall this plane", right? And as with the Viper, the pliot can figure out a way to beat the system with a little help from a programming fault. Hence, we could get into a deep stall and the 'bus crew that night could get "deeply stalled". They did not recognize a stall due to apparent good aero characteristics of the plane. Sat there for over three minutes watching the altimiter unwind while pulling back on the stick the whole way until impact.

Our cadre back in 1980 or 81 did not like the idea of GCAS unless we had override with the paddle switch coupled with an alert that Hal was about to take over. And then there's the mid-air version which I do not see in effect. We have good video of mid-airs that a collision avoidance and flashing "cross" in the HUD could have prevented. Oh well.

Any GCAS should use a lotta inputs other than strict velocity vector and calculated "pull" capability. Gee-loc comes to mind.

If you read the thousand posts about the 737 MCAS over on pPrune blog, you will be "educated".

Gums sends...
Gums
Viper pilot '79
"God in your guts, good men at your back, wings that stay on - and Tally Ho!"
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8381
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post10 Jun 2019, 17:16

Here is a detailed PDF on the F-35 AGCAS testing that just came out on June 7th, 2019.

I put it over on the Program Docs page.
viewtopic.php?p=421517#p421517
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline
User avatar

rheonomic

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 644
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 03:44

Unread post14 Jun 2019, 02:15

Gums wrote:There's a situation for Hal to "suggest" something, and there might be a situation when Hal says, " Dave, I can't let you do that".

The problem with the GCAS and other "protections" is when the pilot atually knows better than Hal !!!!

Our cadre back in 1980 or 81 did not like the idea of GCAS unless we had override with the paddle switch coupled with an alert that Hal was about to take over.

Pilot can override GCAS with stick inputs and it can also be disabled with a HUD switch (I think for example you can watch the video of one of the saves where GCAS activates, pilot comes back to reality from GLOC, has an oh **** moment, and takes over with a much higher G pullout). It's pretty clear from the HUD when GCAS is about to take over also.
Gums wrote:And then there's the mid-air version which I do not see in effect. We have good video of mid-airs that a collision avoidance and flashing "cross" in the HUD could have prevented. Oh well.

That's still in the works (I think it's primarily for cooperative targets right now). Eventually ACAS and GCAS will be integrated together to become ICAS.
Gums wrote:If you read the thousand posts about the 737 MCAS over on pPrune blog, you will be "educated".

Part of the problem is that the team that designed MCAS were a bunch of ****** idiots; it's almost like they were deliberately trying to get everything wrong. MCAS is going to end up as one of those classic engineering "here's what not to do" cases in future textbooks...
"You could do that, but it would be wrong."
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23089
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post19 Jun 2019, 17:57

Auto-GCAS team integrates life-saving system on F-35, wins Collier trophy
19 Jun 2019 NAVair

"Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Maryland--The F-35 Joint Program Office Auto Ground Collision Avoidance System team received the 2018 Robert J. Collier Trophy, June 13, for its rapid design, integration and flight test of critical, lifesaving technology for the global F-35 fleet during a ceremony at the National Air and Space Museum.

Automatic Ground Collision Avoidance System (Auto-GCAS) is a technology designed to save a pilot from crashing into the ground in the event of a sudden loss of consciousness or target fixation by activating and taking control from the pilot to return the plane to safe altitude.

Initial testing of the Auto-GCAS began in 2018 on the F-35A at Edwards Air Force Base, California. As Edward’s F-35 Integrated Test Force (ITF) issued its technical report recommending the system for the A variant to the Joint Program Office, the F-35 Pax River ITF began flight tests on the B variant in early 2019, followed by the C variant.

“The Pax ITF test team is working hard to ensure the fleet is provided an Auto-GCAS system that runs silently in the background while never impeding the warfighter’s maneuverability,” said Lt. Cdr. William Bowen, F-35 test pilot at the Pax River ITF. “In addition to evaluating Auto-GCAS performance, one of our main goals is to ensure the operator has confidence in the system so as to keep it turned on. Thus far, we have not identified any nuisances with the system interface and are satisfied with its performance.”

With the system’s successful flight tests complete on the A and B variants, the fleet will receive Auto-GCAS starting later this year, seven years ahead of schedule….

...The Pax River ITF is on schedule to wrap up testing on the C variant in June.
"


Photo: "F-35 test pilot Dan Levin, Pax River Integrated Test Force, flies an Auto Ground Collision Avoidance System (Auto-GCAS) test flight in an F-35C on a low level through West Virginia, June 17, 2019. Flying the low level helps stress the Auto-GCAS software to confirm there are no false collision warnings while flying as close to the ground as operationally representative. The F-35 Enterprise begins fielding Auto-GCAS on the F-35 fleet in 2019. US Navy photo" http://www.navair.navy.mil/comfrc/osbp/ ... 99-058.jpg (1 Mb)


ZOOM PIC: https://i.imgur.com/FX6YrEJ.jpg

Image

Source: http://www.navair.navy.mil/comfrc/osbp/ ... 92019-1122


http://www.navair.navy.mil/comfrc/osbp/ ... 99-058.jpg

Image
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23089
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post25 Jul 2019, 05:48

USAF F-35As gain safety feature seven years early
24 Jul 2019 Dominic Perry

"Lockheed Martin F-35As operated by the US Air Force have started to receive a ground collision avoidance system seven years ahead of schedule. Integration of the Automatic Ground Collision Avoidance System (Auto-GCAS) onto A-model aircraft has begun, the F-35 Joint Program Office has confirmed....

...Estimates suggest that the technology will prevent more than 26 ground collisions over the stealthy fighter's service life....

...When an impact is diagnosed as imminent, Auto-GCAS will prompt the pilot to take action. If the pilot fails to respond the system will assume temporary control to divert the aircraft to safety....

...Integration of Auto-GCAS onto the F-35 was originally scheduled for 2026. However, under an accelerated process, including evaluation by the USAF's 412th Test Wing at Edwards AFB, that timeline has been advanced. USAF F-35As will be first to receive Auto-GCAS, with the system then rolled out across the F-35B and F-35C variants operated by the US Marine Corps and US Navy, respectively."

Source: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ly-459889/
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23089
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post25 Jul 2019, 06:59

Repeat of above PR stuff then an added bonus added from article to below.
Air Force F-35s Are Getting Ground Collision Avoidance Tech 7 Years Early
24 Jul 2019 Oriana Pawlyk

"..."To accelerate the technology, the Air Force Research Lab and Lockheed Martin conducted positive feasibility studies, and the F-35 Joint Program Office and Lockheed Martin then implemented an agile approach to develop the technology for integration on the F-35," Lockheed said in the statement.

The technology will next be tested and incorporated on the Marine Corps' F-35B and the Navy's F-35C models, according to the release. A timeframe was not provided.

"The safe and effective acceleration of this technology is a testament to the joint government and industry team partnering in an agile environment to deliver life-saving capability to our men and women in uniform, significantly sooner than planned," said Greg Ulmer, Lockheed Martin's vice president and general manager of the F-35 program.

Ulmer told Military.com in September the Auto-GCAS schedule would likely be expedited because Lockheed had begun an "agile construct" where an operator -- such as a pilot -- is "embedded as part of the development team."

Officials have previously noted Auto-GCAS is meant to be used as a backup, not a crutch.

"It's very important they do everything in their power to execute the mission without relying on any safety net to protect them," Lt. Col. Tucker Hamilton, F-35 Integrated Test Force director and 461st commander, said in November during the test trials. "They've got to execute not thinking it's there. They should execute with that mindset. And then if it saves them, it saves them," he said."

Source: https://www.military.com/daily-news/201 ... early.html
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

outlaw162

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1282
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2008, 02:33

Unread post25 Jul 2019, 14:59

They've got to execute not thinking it's there.


Is that the same as 'They've got to execute thinking it's not there' ? :bang:
Online
User avatar

blindpilot

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1214
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2013, 18:21
  • Location: Colorado

Unread post25 Jul 2019, 20:15

outlaw162 wrote:
They've got to execute not thinking it's there.


Is that the same as 'They've got to execute thinking it's not there' ? :bang:


Actually no. Grammatically speaking, ... but also to the point. "Thinking it's not there" is thinking about it, acting as you consider it. Perhaps pulling up 500 feet earlier "just in case," since there's no safety net here ...

"Not thinking it's there," is acting without any consideration of the system, there or not,... acting with mission and purpose focus, without putting the system into the formula. Fly the D** plane, do the job ... Don't press the edge just to get the system to behave, don't lay off soft just to be safe. Fly the mission!

Just sayin'
BP
Offline

outlaw162

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1282
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2008, 02:33

Unread post25 Jul 2019, 21:04

Actually, acting 'not thinking it is there' is a logical fallacy, grammatically correct or not. To go about 'not thinking it is there', you have to cerebrally acknowledge that it is there, in order to not think it is. :D

In any case I imagine a GLOC'd pilot is neither thinking nor 'not thinking', although in cases other than GLOC, I can see a cerebrally conflicted pilot coming down the chute hoping he is able to follow the 'don't think about it' guidance.....but who's going to know either way how each pilot handles it? It's ostensibly intended as insightful, good-intentioned, practical guidance, as impractical and dumb as it is.

"Lieutenant, do you ever execute thinking it's there?"

"No sir, I never, ever execute 'thinking it is there'."

"Excellent mindset, lieutenant. And if it saves you, it saves you. Que sera, sera."

It was a pointless comment to make. That's not the way people fly fighters. They lie, cheat and steal and take advantage of everything available to them to succeed.
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2614
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post25 Jul 2019, 21:44

I don’t know anything about AGCAS software mech. I do know they understand the potential behavioral consequences of ‘nuisance’ commands of the system and have devoted a significant amount of time in flight test toward understanding where the threshold is between ‘nuisance’ and ‘absolute need’ (my words).

I suspect there will be some kind of visual and/or aural warning of an impending actuation, just as there is in some manual warning mechanizations. In other words, the jet isn’t going to take control without plenty of warning first, lest it happen in the middle of counter missile ‘d’, or certain kinds of formation work or, an approach to the ship or some other common thing one might do in a fighter. I wouldn't be surprised if there were also some kind of challenge/response thing between the machine and its operator before it takes over — an appropriate response being one or more of several actions by the pilot that indicate to the jet that its operator is cognitively aware and in the appropriate degree of control given the jet’s attitude/altitude/airspeed etc and prox to the surface of the planet.
Online
User avatar

blindpilot

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1214
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2013, 18:21
  • Location: Colorado

Unread post26 Jul 2019, 00:00

outlaw162 wrote:Actually, acting 'not thinking it is there' is a logical fallacy, grammatically correct or not. To go about 'not thinking it is there', you have to cerebrally acknowledge that it is there, in order to not think it is. :D
....
"Excellent mindset, lieutenant. And if it saves you, it saves you. Que sera, sera."

It was a pointless comment to make. That's not the way people fly fighters. They lie, cheat and steal and take advantage of everything available to them to succeed.


Yeah this is probably pointless nuance, but seeking to understand the point that the 461st Commander was making.

Consider automobile systems.
Seat belts is a safety device that we use with some sense of "thinking that they are there." We think about fastening them .. We might even drive more or less carefully, based on that reality ... 4 year old in the back seat - "Dad fasten your seatbelt!" Dad - "I'll drive really safe to the 7-11 ...."

The airbag is a different device in this context. We rarely consider that we have one, if it is well maintained, etc. etc. It is just there. We drive "not thinking" about the airbag. I believe that's the mindset the Lt Colonel was going for.

FWIW,
BP
Offline

outlaw162

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1282
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2008, 02:33

Unread post26 Jul 2019, 01:58

I think your airbag analogy is sound and what the (Lt) Colonel really means is that he wants to see the majority of F-35 drivers go thru their entire career, racing down the Autobahn without ever having the airbag deploy, not having to be concerned that it's even installed. However....

It's interesting you use the automobile analogy, because I've always been of the bent that the thrust in auto safety has morphed progressively from emphasizing the operator to making cars more and more impervious to crashes, essentially tanks....because they've accepted that human nature doesn't allow for altering stupid behavior behind the wheel.

Fortunately a lot fewer people fly F-35s than drive cars. :mrgreen:
PreviousNext

Return to General F-35 Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests