DESIGN OF A SINGLE PILOT
COCKPIT FOR AIRLINE
OPERATIONS
Jonathan Graham, Chris Hopkins, Andrew Loeber, Soham Trivedi
Overview





Problem: Poor financial performance in commercial aviation and predicted
pilot shortage
Need: System needed to reduce airline costs and hedge potential pilot
shortages
How: Single Pilot Cockpit system potentially reduces pilot labor need and
airline labor cost
Our Job: Analyze design alternative’s ability to meet system need within
project scope and stakeholder win-win
Outcomes: Recommend systems based on the derived feasibility of
designing a Single Pilot Cockpit
2
Agenda









Context
Stakeholder Analysis
Problem & Need
Requirements
Design Alternatives
Simulation & Methodology
Results
Recommendation
Project Management
3
Scope

Large Commercial Air Transportation




US Airspace





Passenger and Cargo Carriers
Carriers With Operating Revenue >$20 Million
Domestic Operations
National Airspace System (NAS)
ATC
FAA Regulatory Body
Financial data adjusted for inflation to 2012
dollars
Flight safety is maintained
4
[1]
Profit/Loss for Major Air Carriers
20.00
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
-10.00
1991
0.00
1990
Dollars (Billions)
10.00
Profit/Loss
Net Income
-20.00
Bankruptcies Filed
-30.00
-40.00



Year
Large air carriers as a whole have had volatile financial
performance
The year 2000 was the tipping point
30% of US Airlines filed for Chapter 11 between 2000-2010
[1] BTS Schedule P1.2
*Values are inflation adjusted to 2012 based on consumer price index
5
[2]
Projected Total Operating Expense for Major Air Carriers
200.00
Operating Expense (Billions)
180.00
160.00
Total
Operating
Expense
140.00
120.00
100.00
Projected
Total
Operating
Expense
80.00
60.00
40.00
20.00
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
1990
0.00
Year


Projected growth in operating expense
Reducing operating expense relative to operating
revenue is good for financial stability
[2] BTS Schedule P5.2
*Values are inflation adjusted to 2012 based on consumer price index
6
% Operations Expense for Major Air Carriers
[3]
60.00
% Operations Cost
50.00
40.00
% Pilot
30.00
% Fuel
20.00
% Dir Maint
10.00
% Air Ops
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
1990
0.00
Year

Large percentage of operating expense is composed of
fuel and pilot labor costs
Fuel costs are a variable cost
 Pilot labor costs are easier to control

[3] BTS Schedule P5.2
*Values are inflation adjusted to 2012 based on consumer price index
7
[4]
Projected Pilots
80
Pilots (Thousands)
70
60
50
40
Total Pilots
30
Projected
Pilot Demand
20
Projected
Supply
10
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
1990
0
Year





The number of pilots has been relatively static for the last decade
Pilot labor growth has been much greater in the past
Flight hour requirements and decreased retirement age impacting future pilot supply
6% Growth in commercial pilot labor projected from 2012-2022 using FAA forecasts for 2013-2033 [9]
~4,500 Air Transport Pilot licenses per year from 2004-2012 [5]
[4] BTS Schedule P10
[5] WSJ Airlines Face Acute Shortage of Pilots, Carey et al.
*8.94% attrition rate and fixed licensure rate used to plot shortage curve in red [11]
8
[5] & [6]
180.00
160.00
140.00
120.00
100.00
80.00
60.00
40.00
20.00
0.00
Industry Profitable
Cost Per Pilot
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
Cost Increasing
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
Industry In Decline &
Salary Negotiation
1990
Cost (Thousands)
Cost Per Pilot
Year



The cost per pilot has a period of decline from 2000-2008
Slowly increasing at present
Pay schedules established for salary increases
[6] BTS Schedule P10
[7] BTS Schedule P5.2
*Values are inflation adjusted to 2012 based on consumer price index
9
Historical Cockpit Devolution


Historically the need for cost reduction has changed
the roles of the flight crew
Size of the cockpit flight crew has been shrinking
10
Radio
Flight
Navigator
Co-Pilot?
Operator
Engineer
Is a Single Pilot Cockpit the Next Step?
11
The Flight Deck

Two pilots operate the aircraft

Pilot Flying



Pilot Not Flying





Flies the Aircraft
Confirms Callouts
Inspects/Manipulates Instruments
Performs Callouts
Interacts with ATC
Flies on Behalf of Pilot
Both captain and co-pilot can take on each role during a flight
12
Cockpit Avionics
MCP
Center Instrument Panel
1st Officer’s Instrument Panel
MCDU
Overhead Panel
13
Flight Procedures


Procedures are followed to operate an aircraft
Flight Crew Operating Manual (FCOM) RJ100



Describes flight procedures
Official FAA approved document
Identifies responsible entities for procedural tasks


Pilot Flying (PF)
Pilot Not Flying (PNF)
14
Procedure Decomposition



A procedure is decomposed by tasks and
physical/cognitive actions that are required to
execute a task
Procedure
FCOM Codifies Procedures

63 Procedures

613 Total Tasks

737 Total Actions
Procedures are decomposed to identify potential
reallocation of actions to a design alternative
Tasks
Actions
15
Example Procedure
16
Action Frequencies
160
140
120
100
80
PF
60
PNF
40
B/P
20
0
Physical
Instrument
Manipulation
Verbal Cockpit
Callout
Physical Flight
Computer
Interaction
Auditory
Reception
Memory Action Visual Instrument
Inspection
Visual
Environment
Inspection
Verbal External
Communication
% Actions by Pilot
B/P
5%
PF
40%
PNF
55%
17
17
Agenda









Background & Context
Stakeholder Analysis
Problem & Need
Requirements
Design Alternatives
Simulation & Methodology
Results
Recommendation
Project Management
18
Stakeholder Interactions
Support SPC
Reserved about SPC
Oppose SPC
19
19
Stakeholder
Group
Regulatory Agencies
Primary
Objectives
•
Maximize:
• Flight safety
• Consumer protection
A SPC would inherently introduce new risks and
decrease overall flight safety, leading regulatory
agencies to withhold their approval
•
Maintain:
• Job Stability
• Wage Stability
• Safety level
• Workload
View SPC as a major potential threat to job stability,
leading to a high risk of pushback
•
Minimize:
• Travel time
• Flight risk
• Ticket expenses
May have reservations about flying in a plane with
only one pilot, leading them to avoid flying with an
airline that uses SPC
•
Maintain:
• Consistent revenues
• Customer base
• Market predictability
• Low risk profile
Want to increase profitability through sales/service,
but don’t want to increase expenses commit to long
term investments without noticeable return
2020
(FAA, DoT)
Aviation Workforce
(Pilots, Pilots’ Unions, ATC, ATC Unions)
Customer Base
Aviation Industry
(Air Carriers, Management,
Manufactures, Insurance, & Airports)
Tension with SPC
Agenda








Background & Context
Stakeholder Analysis
Problem & Need
Design Alternatives
Simulation & Methodology
Results
Recommendation
Project Management
21
Problem Statement

Rising operating expense contributes to financial
instability in commercial aviation
 Profitability

is difficult to achieve
Pilot labor shortage predicted
22
GAP Analysis
Operating Revenue to Operating Expense Ratio
*BTS Schedule P5.2
1.4
1.2
1
Ratio
0.8
0.6
Ratio
0.4
Target
Ratio
0.2
0
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Year
*Values are inflation adjusted to 2012 based on consumer price index
23
Need Statement

Airlines will continue to have volatile financial
performance if operating costs continue to grow
 Variable
costs like fuel driving operating expense
 Labor expense can be controlled more effectively

A single pilot cockpit is needed to decrease labor
expense and mitigate the effects of a pilot
shortage
24
Win-Win Analysis


Majority of stakeholders involved have serious conflicts with moving to
a single-pilot system
However, these issues can be mitigated by extending the phase-in
process



Helps to minimize safety concerns brought on by major systemic change
Decreases financial risk
Gradual labor downsizing
Today
+10-15 Years
+20-30 Years
Two Pilot
Cockpit
Two Pilot
Cockpit with
Alternative
Evaluation of
Alternative
+40 Years
Single Pilot
Cockpit
25
Organization
Tension to be
Mitigated
Benefit to Slow Phase-In
Fear of elevated risk
caused by removing a
pilot
Allows regulatory agencies to observe the effects of implementing a
SPC and collect reliability data without the worry of deploying an
uncertain system and dealing with damage control.
Fear of labor downsizing
The resultant decline in pilot labor demand can be spread out over
several decades, meaning that job stability can remain relatively
stable, and pilots can adapt to using a new system. A SPC system can
also potentially reduce a pilot’s workload.
Customer Base
Fear of boarding a
plane being flown by a
single pilot
Fliers with concerns about the safety of a SPC will be allowed more
time to acclimate to the new technology. Also, the majority viewpoint
will shift due to changing generational attitudes regarding automation
in general.
Aviation Industry
Fear of costs/changes
needed to adapt to new
system
Airports and aircraft manufacturers will be given additional time to
adapt their operations, products, and business plans to the current
phase of SPC deployment, keeping them from wasting resources on
developing unutilized solutions.
26
Regulatory
Agencies
Aviation
Workforce
Agenda









Background & Context
Stakeholder Analysis
Problem & Need
Requirements
Design Alternatives
Simulation & Methodology
Results
Recommendation
Project Management
27
Requirements
Requirement ID Description
M.1
The single pilot cockpit system shall reduce or maintain the baseline pilot flying
procedure time of TBX.1
M.2
The single pilot cockpit system shall meet ARP4761 Level A assurance of 1
failure per billion flight hours.
M.3
The single pilot cockpit system shall decrease yearly pilot labor operating
expense.
M.4
The single pilot cockpit system shall have a total aircraft lifecycle cost no
greater than TBX.2 dollars.
28
Agenda









Background & Context
Stakeholder Analysis
Problem & Need
Requirements
Design Alternatives
Simulation & Methodology
Results
Recommendation
Project Management
29
Design Alternatives
1.
2.
3.
4.
Two Pilot Cockpit (No Change)
Single Pilot with No Support
Onboard Procedure Support System
Remote Ground Pilot Terminal
30
Physical Process Diagram
Flight Goal
Start Aircraft State
System
Target Aircraft State
Pilots Procedures
31
Integration Concept
MCP
Center Instrument Panel
Remote
Alternative
1st Officer’s Instrument Panel
Onboard
Alternative
MCDU
Overhead Panel
32
Baseline Two Pilot
Cockpit


Single Pilot No
Automation
Procedure Support
System
Ground Pilot
Terminal
No Change to current two pilot system
Nothing is modified from operating manual
33
Baseline Two Pilot
Cockpit


Single Pilot No
Procedure Support
Procedure Support
System
Ground Pilot
Terminal
Remove the co-pilot and transfer all the procedures
to the remaining pilot
No new systems supporting the single pilot
34
Baseline Two Pilot
Cockpit


Single Pilot No
Procedure Support
Procedure Support
System
Ground Pilot
Terminal
All PNF
tasks moved
to the PF
Eliminate
callouts
35
Baseline Two Pilot
Cockpit



Single Pilot No
Procedure Support
Procedure Support
System
Ground Pilot
Terminal
Onboard system integrating with avionics
Can receive inputs from avionics to automate pilot
actions and provide feedback to pilot flying
No ability to control plane
 Report
to PF who controls ops
 Interactive front end for pilot
36
Baseline Two Pilot
Cockpit


Single Pilot No
Procedure Support
Some PNF
actions taken
over by
automation
Used for
situational
awareness
for PF during
a procedure
Procedure Support
System
Ground Pilot
Terminal
37
Baseline Two Pilot
Cockpit



Single Pilot No
Procedure Support
Procedure Support
System
Ground Pilot
Terminal
Ground pilot monitors flight and
interacts with ATC on behalf of
the airplane
No control capability
Requires specialized ground
networks and infrastructure
38
Baseline Two Pilot
Cockpit


Single Pilot No
Procedure Support
Procedure Support
System
Ground Pilot
Terminal
Some PNF
actions taken
over by
ground pilot
Primarily
handles ATC
& diagnostic
procedures
39
Agenda









Background & Context
Stakeholder Analysis
Problem & Need
Requirements
Design Alternatives
Simulation & Methodology
Results
Recommendation
Project Management
40
Model & Simulation Assumptions








Flight safety is maintained or improved
Keystroke Level Model and other human computer interaction parameters
approximate operator actions in cockpit
Ignore future/emerging aviation systems
Human factors out of scope
Assume alternatives follow contemporary avionics costs
RJ100 FCOM is representative of similar operating manuals compiled by
commercial airlines
Assume procedures in operating manual are complete representation of flight
Ignore additional company specific pilot tasks
41
Procedural Model


Input data derived from RJ100 Flight Crew Operating
Manual (FCOM)
Convert FCOM and classify procedures based on ontology



Procedures are changed for each alternative
One procedure model for each alternative
Each alternative’s procedural model is translated into an
XML representation

XML is parsed into simulation
42
Procedural Simulation




Java program
Input procedural model for
each alternative
Output Alternative
Processing Time (APT)
Run several simulation
replications for each
alternative and perform
statistical tests on results
Procedure Model
Simulation
Processing Time
43
Procedural Simulation Formulas
Simulation
𝑙
𝑘
𝐴𝑃𝑇 = 𝒘𝑷 =
𝑃𝑖 =
𝑤𝑖 𝑃𝑖
𝑜
𝑇𝑗
𝑇𝑗 =
𝑗=1
𝑖=1
𝐴𝑚
𝑚=1
𝐴𝑚 ~ln(𝑁 𝜇, 𝜎 2 )
𝐴𝑚 ~U(a, b)
𝐴𝑚 ~Tri(c, d, e)
𝐴𝑃𝑇 = 𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒
𝑃𝑖 = 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑐𝑒𝑑𝑢𝑟𝑒
𝑇𝑗 = 𝑡𝑎𝑠𝑘
𝐴𝑚 = 𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛
𝑤𝑖 = 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑐𝑒𝑑𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑙 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡
Replications
𝑍𝛼 ∗ 𝑆0
𝑅𝑒𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠 ≥
2
𝜀
Analysis
2
𝑡=
𝐴𝑃𝑇𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙 − 𝐴𝑃𝑇𝐴𝑙𝑡
𝑠12 𝑠22
+
𝑁1 𝑁2
𝐻0 : 𝐴𝑃𝑇𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙 ≥ 𝐴𝑃𝑇𝐴𝑙𝑡
𝐻1 : 𝐴𝑃𝑇𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙 < 𝐴𝑃𝑇𝐴𝑙𝑡
𝑅𝑒𝑗𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑖𝑓: 𝑃 > 0.05
44
44
Design of Experiment
Input
Output
Alternative
Procedures
Tasks
Action Times
Alternative
Processing Times
Single Pilot
No Support
P1…Pn
T1m…Tnm
Lognormal~A1r…Amr
TBD
Two Pilot
P1…Pn
T1o…Tno
Lognormal~A1r…Aor
TBD
Procedure
Support
System
P1…Pn
T1p…Tnp
Lognormal~A1r…Apr
Uniform~A1r…Apr
TBD
Ground Pilot
Terminal
P1…Pn
T1q…Tnq
Lognormal~A1r…Aqr
Triangular~A1r…Aqr
TBD
45
Business Case


Develop model and simulation to analyze alternatives’
cost feasibility
Aircraft lifecycle cost
Data collected for Boeing 737-300 (most common aircraft)
 Random variables describe costs (BTS data)



Use Monte Carlo to get average aircraft lifecycle cost
If LCC>Labor Cost – system is not worthwhile
46
Business Case Formulas
Cost Formulas
𝑁
𝐸 𝐴𝐿𝐶 = 𝐶𝐴𝑙𝑡 +
𝑡=1
𝐶𝑃𝑖𝑙𝑜𝑡
+
1+𝑑 𝑡
𝐶𝐴𝑙𝑡 = 𝐴𝑙𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡
𝐶𝑂𝑡ℎ𝐿𝑎𝑏𝑜𝑟 = 𝑂𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟 𝐿𝑎𝑏𝑜𝑟 𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡𝑠
𝑁
𝑡=1
𝐶𝑂𝑡ℎ𝐿𝑎𝑏𝑜𝑟
+
1+𝑑 𝑡
𝑁
𝑡=1
𝐶𝑃𝑖𝑙𝑜𝑡 = 𝑃𝑖𝑙𝑜𝑡 𝐿𝑎𝑏𝑜𝑟 𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡
𝐶𝑀𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑡
1+𝑑 𝑡
𝑑 = 𝐼𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑡
𝐶𝑀𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑡 = 𝐴𝑖𝑟𝑐𝑟𝑎𝑓𝑡 𝑀𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡𝑠
47
Design of Experiment
Input
Output
Alternative
Alternative
Cost
Other Labor &
Maintenance
Expected Aircraft Lifecycle
Cost
Single Pilot No
Automation
Triangular(a,b,c)
Triangular(a,b,c)
Triangular(a,b,c)
Two Pilot
--
Triangular(a,b,c)
Triangular(a,b,c)
Procedure Support
System
Triangular(d,e,f)
Triangular(a,b,c)
Triangular(a,b,c)
Ground Pilot
Terminal
Triangular(g,h,i)
Triangular(a,b,c)
Triangular(a,b,c)
48
Value Hierarchy
Single Pilot
Utility
Alternative
Processing
Time
In Scope
Out of Scope
Safety
TRL
Profitability
Training
Liability
Maintenance
Usability
49
Agenda









Background & Context
Stakeholder Analysis
Problem & Need
Requirements
Design Alternatives
Simulation & Methodology
Results
Recommendation
Project Management
50
Anticipated Results

Expect the Procedural Support System and Ground
Pilot Terminal to reduce processing times
 Unsupported
Single Pilot will have highest processing
times

Cost of Ground Pilot Terminal will be significant
 Cost
of Unsupported Single Pilot and Procedure
Support will be the least
51
Agenda









Background & Context
Stakeholder Analysis
Problem & Need
Requirements
Design Alternatives
Simulation & Methodology
Results
Recommendation
Project Management
52
Anticipated Recommendation


Will recommend keeping two pilot cockpit and evolve
alternative system per the win-win scenario
Procedure Support system to be phased in and
evaluated for the eventual change to the single pilot
cockpit
Today
+10-15 Years
+20-30 Years
Two Pilot
Cockpit
Two Pilot
Cockpit with
Alternative
Evaluation of
Alternative
+40 Years
Single Pilot
Cockpit
53
Agenda









Background & Context
Stakeholder Analysis
Problem & Need
Requirements
Design Alternatives
Simulation & Methodology
Results
Recommendation
Project Management
54
Work Breakdown
55
Schedule
56
Schedule Detail

Critical Paths:
 10.0
Deliverable Preparation & Assembly
 8.0 Modeling & Simulation

Majority of subtasks completed in first semester with
long run subtasks remaining leading to competition
57
Risk
Risk
Simulation Complexity
Procedure Complexity
Description
There is a chance that the complexity of the
simulation and task model will cause scheduling
delays which may impact the ability to produce
results for the IEEE paper due in February.
The number of procedures to be modeled is very
large and takes significant resources due to manual
nature of input.
Mitigation
Plan to devote significant work to simulation
during the winter break period. Simulation
coding started ahead of schedule.
Plan to make baseline model and make
simplifications to existing structure rather
than re-authoring all procedures.
Busy Co-Sponsor
NASA Ames researcher has been unavailable to
support project.
Working with other sponsors to get
additional resources.
Input Data
Serious assumptions were made in regards to task
performance modeling. Further information is
required to find additional data to validate
assumption or provide actual performance data.
Soliciting feedback from professors,
sponsor, and professional pilots. Rely on
sensitivity analysis to test assumptions.
Rating
Likelihood: Likely
Impact: Major
Likelihood: Likely
Impact: Major
Likelihood: Likely
Impact: Minor
Likelihood: Very
Likely
Impact: Major
58
Budgeting Parameters




$50.00 base hourly rate
$106.38 hourly rate w/ GMU overhead factor
Estimate 701 hours
Budgeted Cost of $74,574.47
59
EVM
$110,000.00
$90,000.00
$70,000.00
Faculty Presentations
Dollars
EV
$50,000.00
PV
Final Draft
AC
Conferences
$30,000.00
Abstract &
Manuscript
Worst Case
Best Case
Final Proposal
$10,000.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38
-$10,000.00
Week
60
CPI / SPI
1.40
1.20
1.00
Ratio
0.80
CPI
0.60
SPI
0.40
0.20
0.00
1
2
3
4
5
6
Week
7
8
9
10
61
Questions?
62
Sources
[1] BTS Schedule P1.2 http://www.transtats.bts.gov/Fields.asp?Table_ID=295
[2] BTS Schedule P5.2 http://www.transtats.bts.gov/Fields.asp?Table_ID=297
[3] BTS Schedule P5.2 http://www.transtats.bts.gov/Fields.asp?Table_ID=297
[4] BTS Schedule P10 http://www.transtats.bts.gov/Fields.asp?Table_ID=302
[5] WSJ Airlines Face Acute Shortage of Pilots
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052970203937004578079391643223634#ar
ticleTabs%3Darticle
[6] BTS Schedule P10 http://www.transtats.bts.gov/Fields.asp?Table_ID=302
[7] BTS Schedule P5.2 http://www.transtats.bts.gov/Fields.asp?Table_ID=297
[8] BTS T-100 Market & Segment http://apps.bts.gov/xml/air_traffic/src/index.xml#MonthlySystem
[9] FAA Aerospace Forecast FY2013-2033
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/apl/aviation_forecasts/aerospace_forecasts/20132033/media/2013_Forecast.pdf
[10] Inflation CPI Source http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/
[11] US Pilot Labor Supply
http://www.faa.gov/news/conferences_events/aviation_forecast_2010/agenda/media/GAF%20Jim%20Higgins%20and%20Kent
%20Love.pdf
63
Backup
64
[7]
Projected Passenger Miles
Passenger Miles (Billions)
1,200
1,000
800
600
Domestic
400
Total
200
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
0
Year


Passenger demand increase of 30% projected over next
10 years [8]
Commercial aviation under pressure to meet demand
while achieving profitability
[8] BTS T-100 Market & Segment
[9] FAA Aerospace Forecast FY2013-2033
*Values are inflation adjusted to 2012 based on consumer price index
65
65
Cost Model
Input
Description
Average Fleet Age
The average fleet age as timeframe for lifecycle of “typical”
aircraft
Average Pilot Cost
Yearly pilot cost based on average pay schedules with pay
increase
Alternative Investment
The expected cost per unit to deploy alternative
Interest
Rate of forgoing alternative investments
Other Aircraft
Operating Expenses
Operating expense for aircraft as reported through BTS
treated as random variates
66
Alternatives Satisfying Requirements
Mission
Requirement
Single Pilot No
Support
Two Pilots
Task Support
System
Ground Pilot
Terminal
Task Load
X

TBD
TBD
Reliability
X


TBD
Operating
Expense

TBD
TBD
TBD
Lifecycle Cost

TBD
TBD
TBD
67


Decompose tasks into Excel
Select roles and cognitive functions





Visual Instrument Inspection
Visual Environment Inspection
Verbal Callout
Physical Instrument Manipulation
Etc.
68
68



Parse Excel spreadsheet into
an XML schema
Hierarchy of tasks captured
by XML
Parsed into simulation
69
69