Comparative Evaluation of EMADS (Engine Monitoring And Display System) and Conventional Engine Instruments

摘要

A study was conducted to assess the performance benefits associated with the use of the General Electric Engine Monitoring and Display System (EMADS). An experiment was designed to compare pilot performance using both EMADS and conventional engine instruments. Data was collected from eight DC-10 qualified pilots having an average of over 13,000 hours of flight experience. The flight task for each of the sixteen test trials consisted of engine startup, manual takeoff, and climbout to 5,000 feet in a fixed base simulator. In addition, a number of predefined engine related fault conditions were introduced at various points during the simulation, with the pilots being instructed to execute the appropriate corrective action. For each of the fault monitoring tasks, performance (reaction time) with EMADS was as good or better than that resulting from the use of conventional instruments. Subjective input obtained from the pilots indicated a clear preference for EMADS. Recommendations are made regarding future research activity.