A flight simulation project was conducted to determine the relative alerting efficacy of artificial aural and tactile warning signals for alerting pilots to an impending stall condition. Five pilots with current private flying experience participated as subjects in the evaluation of a continuous warning horn signal, an interrupted warning horn signal, and tactile stickshakers with and without an aural (clacker-type) signal. While performing an intricate in-flight pattern task in a flight simulator, pilots were required to respond to aural and tactile warning signals if and when they were detected. The results show that a stickshaker warning signal is the most effective means of alerting a pilot (99 percent effective) followed by an interrupted horn (84 percent effective). The continuous or steady horn, currently used in most aircraft, was only 64 percent effective in alerting a pilot. The results also show that aural signals are least detected when the in-cockpit task or workload requires a high degree of pilot attention. (Author)
Experimentation and Evaluation of Improved Stall Warning Equipment
1969
28 pages
Report
Keine Angabe
Englisch
MINIMUM PERFORMANCE STANDARD STALL WARNING EQUIPMENT
SAE Technical Papers | 1986
Minimum Performance Standard Stall Warning Equipment
SAE Technical Papers | 2020
SAE Technical Papers | 2022