On Annunciator Inadequacy
01.11.96 21:49 Filed in: Performance
Indicators
Imagine a control room where the sum of all the
indicators was reduced to eight or ten key
indicators which, through competent design,
provided the operator adequate information for
control of the plant. Annunciators would not be
needed unless it was intended or expected that
the operator would not focus his attention on the
indications.
This, of course, raises the question of what mechanism could be used to display information in a manner that would obviate the need for annunciators. The current background listening in the domain of engineering does not allow for the existence of analytical indicators. By analytical I mean instrumentation that presents an interpretation of the situation or event, rather than reporting some engineering fact.
We are starting to see trends in that direction in combat aircraft flight information displays. Velocity vectors and waterline indicators are HUD related information that make interpretations about the future of the aircraft based on current status. This relieves the pilot from having to make engineering assessments of flight parameters in order to maneuver the aircraft. They make a declaration that if the pilot continues as things are, the plane will be in this position in the future.
At this point, we make another distinction between predictive and interpretive. Predictive is merely an engineering, mathematical, or mechanical projection of the current situation into the future. Interpretive is the incorporation of judgment or multi–parameter reasoning or evaluation into the indication. In this sense, the tactical display information in the F/A–18 HUD is predominately predictive. Designs are being proposed, however, that would assimilate all sensed and calculated information and present the pilot with best possible choice displays. For example, based on current flight parameters, detected threats on the ground and in the air, and the declared ground target from the navigation computer, a single color monitor could present the pilot with a pseudo three–dimensional map that presents the “least threat” path to the target. This is clearly in the interpretive realm, and also not ready for control room indication.
What then does interpretive indication mean in the context of the control room? What kind of judgment or interpretation do we use to drive these displays? Can information be reduced to meaningful operational indicators that adequately address the full range of concerns that exist? These are questions that must be answered before we can competently present alternatives to the clearly less than adequate annunciator methodology. Without alternatives, there is no compelling argument for change. Without change, we will continue to exist in an environment where annuciators are seen as adequate and effective.
-----------
This article and incorporated images are ©1996 Brad Williamson All Rights Reserved. Permission is granted for reproduction not for profit in its entirety including this copyright notice.
-----------
This, of course, raises the question of what mechanism could be used to display information in a manner that would obviate the need for annunciators. The current background listening in the domain of engineering does not allow for the existence of analytical indicators. By analytical I mean instrumentation that presents an interpretation of the situation or event, rather than reporting some engineering fact.
We are starting to see trends in that direction in combat aircraft flight information displays. Velocity vectors and waterline indicators are HUD related information that make interpretations about the future of the aircraft based on current status. This relieves the pilot from having to make engineering assessments of flight parameters in order to maneuver the aircraft. They make a declaration that if the pilot continues as things are, the plane will be in this position in the future.
At this point, we make another distinction between predictive and interpretive. Predictive is merely an engineering, mathematical, or mechanical projection of the current situation into the future. Interpretive is the incorporation of judgment or multi–parameter reasoning or evaluation into the indication. In this sense, the tactical display information in the F/A–18 HUD is predominately predictive. Designs are being proposed, however, that would assimilate all sensed and calculated information and present the pilot with best possible choice displays. For example, based on current flight parameters, detected threats on the ground and in the air, and the declared ground target from the navigation computer, a single color monitor could present the pilot with a pseudo three–dimensional map that presents the “least threat” path to the target. This is clearly in the interpretive realm, and also not ready for control room indication.
What then does interpretive indication mean in the context of the control room? What kind of judgment or interpretation do we use to drive these displays? Can information be reduced to meaningful operational indicators that adequately address the full range of concerns that exist? These are questions that must be answered before we can competently present alternatives to the clearly less than adequate annunciator methodology. Without alternatives, there is no compelling argument for change. Without change, we will continue to exist in an environment where annuciators are seen as adequate and effective.
-----------
This article and incorporated images are ©1996 Brad Williamson All Rights Reserved. Permission is granted for reproduction not for profit in its entirety including this copyright notice.
-----------
|