AeroVironment Ground Control Station

      AeroVironment, Inc. (AV) develops and manufactures scores of unmanned aircraft and electric vehicle solutions. Amongst its family of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) is a line of small UAS widely used in support of the war effort in Iraq and Afghanistan; these ruggedized, compact, and portable UAS provide excellent intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) coverage in the battlefield while gaining popularity in civil applications (Imagination, Passion, and Persistence, 2014).
               

     All AV small UAS such as the Raven, Puma, Wasp, and Dragon Eye are controlled by a common ground control station (GCS) which provides the command and control (C2), communications, data and video link to the air vehicle. AV’s GCS is a small, lightweight, compact, dustproof, waterproof, and battle-tested GCS capable of displaying real time video capture from the air vehicle payload cameras. Operators are able to capture screen images, store, playback, and re-transmit video and metadata on the network. The GCS can be used as a remote video terminal (RVT) at remote command centers providing the same capabilities as the operator’s GCS. Capable of manual and autonomous C2 the AV GCS components fit in a small sack and take only a small portion of a typical small backpack (GCS - Joint Common Interoperable Ground Control Station, 2014).


Other features of the AV common GCS include:

• An intuitive user interface built on the company’s proprietary core operating system
• Storage for up to 80 image  captures and multiple preprogrammed missions
• Ability to operate as a remote video terminal
• Manual, Altitude-Hold, Navigate, Loiter, Home, Loss-of-Link, Follow Me, and Auto land modes of operation
• Operates on common military BA-5590/U (or similar) battery
• Has a fully-packaged weight of only 7.42 pounds
• Available options include a Panasonic Toughbook laptop, Falcon view software,  and an RVT Kit Antenna

                Although a single operator can work the AV GCS, a two-person team is more ideal and is the preferred mode of operation. A study at the Army Research Laboratory on Raven operations found that GCS operators are subject to high workloads in a typical 40-45 minute mission (Pomranky, 2006). Task saturation can lead to a loss in situational awareness. Manning, Rash, LeDuc, Noback, and McKeon (2004) states that a loss in situational awareness is a leading causal factor in aviation mishaps.  The same advantages which make the GCS a popular military tactical gear, such as its portability and small design, may also cause conditions which can be detrimental to maintaining situational awareness. The vehicle operator uses a handheld controller about the size of a typical seven inch tablet computer with user control and input buttons and knobs on either side of the screen. It lacks a map display (maps are resident on the Toughbook computer) which is invaluable in determining the air vehicle’s location. This is where multiple operators become valuable; mission tasks can be tackled more effectively when divided between two operators – one to operate the hand controller and the other to program and monitor the mission on the laptop.
                Also, because of its small screen size, the hand controller display contains a significant amount of flight information that can overwhelm the operator. Add to that the need for a hood to shroud the screen from bright sunlight and give the operator a better viewing experience. This may cause some disorientation when switching from a hooded view, causing a loss in situational awareness for a few seconds while the operator’s vision recovers in transition.
                Task saturation and issues with multifunction display and control systems’ design are common to manned aircraft and AV’s small UAS mentioned above. Both human factors can adversely affect the operator’s performance which may lead to a mishap.

Reference

GCS - Joint Common Interoperable Ground Control Station. (2014, June 10). Retrieved from AeroVironment, Inc.: http://www.avinc.com/downloads/AV_GCS_V10109.pdf

Imagination, Passion, and Persistence. (2014, June 10). Retrieved from AeroVironment, Inc.: http://www.avinc.com/

Manning, S., Rash, C., LeDuc, P., Noback, R., & McKeon, J. (2004). The Role of Human Causal Factors in U.S. Army Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Accidents. U.S. Army Aeromedical Research Laboratory.

Pomranky, R. (2006). Human Robotics Interaction Army Tehcnology Objective Raven Small Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Task Analysis and Modeling. Army Research Laboratory.