Technical Committee A-6, Aerospace Actuation, Control and Fluid Power SystemsSAE A-6 Project A-6A3-08 ARP94910, Guide to the Specification of an FCS for a Military y UA Presentation for Panel “Access to Ai Airspace” ” William B. Facey NAVAIR 4 4.3.2.6 3 2 6 Flight Controls Branch Patuxent River NAS, MD [email protected] AUVSI’s Unmanned Systems North America 2009 Washington, DC, August 10-13, 2009 9/3/2009, Page 1 DC. the US Army and the USAF. Design Installation and Test of Piloted Military Aircraft Aircraft. Version of the AS for UAs suggested to Armed Services and drew immediate support from NAVAIR. Aerospace Actuation. conforming to broadly accepted engineering practices” an ARP . with content of a more general nature. or that have not yet gained broad acceptance.” AUVSI’s Unmanned Systems North America 2009 Washington. Control and Fluid Power Systems Project Definition & Approval • In July 2007 the A-6 released AS94900 “Aerospace – Flight Control Systems – Design. 2009 9/3/2009. General Specification For “ • • • • Adopted by DoD to replace MIL-F-9490 on November 5.Technical Committee A-6.Aerospace Recommended Practice – “is intended as a guide to standard engineering practices…. Approved by A-6 Steering Council as an ARP because “although the FCS technology employed for UAs is mature. 2007. the application is not” Whereas an AS – Aerospace Standard – “contains specific performance requirements…. August 10-13. Page 2 . – UAs have different needs from manned aircraft • Currently no standards for UA FCS subsystems. – The specifications for UAs now in development relied on selecting relevant requirements from manned aircraft specifications. DC. . • Not always possible if not designed into system from start. Page 3 . • Difficult. – UA “mission creep” .Technical Committee A-6.continuing expansion of UAS missions and operating areas. AUVSI’s Unmanned Systems North America 2009 Washington. Aerospace Actuation. 2009 9/3/2009. August 10-13. • Drives us to require q increased levels of airworthiness out of UAS platforms. Control and Fluid Power Systems What is The Need? • A document that will provide a basis for making design and performance f decisions d i i and dj judgments d f for f future UA UAs. time-consuming gp process with no industry y involvement. Page 4 . design design.Technical Committee A-6.4 in the DOD 2007 roadmap. 2009 9/3/2009. test and quality assurance requirements. August 10-13. il AUVSI’s Unmanned Systems North America 2009 Washington. – Function and performance oriented • Guiding creation of a performance requirement specification • Covers FCS and subsystems design and integration with the vehicle but does not specify specific architectural approaches. (Except smallest – TBD) – Comprehensive guide to general performance performance. Control and Fluid Power Systems Terms of Reference – Guide to the specification of the FCS for the UA not the entire UAS • Also applies to Vehicle Management Systems that incorporate the FCS – Cover range of FCS capability required for the range of UAs covered by figure A. similar in structure. DC. • Primarily Pi il b behavior h i f following ll i fi first t and d second d FCS f failures. scope and depth to AS94900. • Emphasis: E h i – The differing levels of performance capability required for different UA categories and operational areas. development development. Aerospace Actuation. Page 5 . standard. • It is likely to precede standards and regulations determining how some key requirements are derived. UA standards writing will be iterative for some time. DC. Aerospace Actuation. 2011 • We think. with the exception of standards associated with UA engines this will be the first UA subsystem standard engines. release in 2011.Technical Committee A-6. August 10-13. 2009 9/3/2009. Control and Fluid Power Systems Concluding Notes: • First A-6 balloting to A-6 panels and A-6 in 2010. AUVSI’s Unmanned Systems North America 2009 Washington.