RQ-11B Raven – Ground Control Station

Functional Operation                                 
            The ground control station (GCS) portion of many unmanned aerial systems (UAS) provide a control interface to the operator in order to govern the unmanned aircraft manually, autonomously, or remotely manage a given mission (Marshall, Barnhart, Shappee, & Most, 2016). Ground control stations come in many sizes. In the case of the RQ-11B Raven, the ground control station was designed to be lightweight and portable in order for ground troops to carry into battle. The simple ground control unit and aircraft design allows troops to quickly learn how to operate and perform the RQ-11B Raven’s primary intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) mission (Rudaski, 2014). The RQ-11B created by AeroVironment operates off a handheld controller (Figure 1) and uses onboard cameras to steam a live video feed to a remote video terminal (RVT). The handheld controller and RVT are operated indecently by two operators who also setup and break down the Raven and GCS. The simple structure of the ground control station originally had a four channel analog link for line-of-sight operations, but in 2010 the RQ-11B Raven was upgraded to include a digital datalink capability for faster transition to the GCS from the UAV (Wasserbly, 2009).


Figure 1. RQ-11B handheld controller GCS. Reprinted from Introduction to Unmanned Aircraft Systems, Second Edition. D. Marshall. 2016.

Negative Human Factors and Solutions
Many operators of today’s RQ-11Bs are used to functional displays that can be customized to fit their needs while completing certain tasks. During the first iterations of the RQ-11, operators requested that configurations of the RVT screens be customizable to fit the tastes of a given operator (McHale, 2010). Since then, the display screens on the RVT have been made more functionally customizable so that operators can increase efficiency. Another human factors issue with the RQ-11B GCS is the daytime black visor hood used to view the handheld controller during sunlight operations. In the heat of a battle, operators could suffer from channelized or selective attention leading to errors in operation of the UAV. The key strategy to overcoming selective attention is crew coordination of monitoring duties thereby mitigating the load stress on any one individual (Marshal et al., 2016).

Common Human Factors
            As with many manned aircraft today, the rise in the amount of automation in unmanned aerial systems can be a blessing and a curse. Situational awareness and its four aspects (vigilance, diagnosis, risk analysis, and action) can be difficult to maintain when flying any airframe (Marshall et al., 2016). For the RQ-11, the information provided to the operator can be useful to ground troops in a given area or to the operators themselves before the press on to a desired location. However, while gathering information on an area viewed by the UAV, it can be difficult to maintain situational awareness of the operator’s immediate surrounding. For example, a reconnaissance mission aimed at monitoring an enemy’s position ten miles downrange could potentially lead to the operators being caught unaware of the enemy near their own position. The same can be said of manned aircraft. With so many tools to maintain situational awareness of the battlefield, pilots can become overwhelmed by the amount of data and fail to see a caution or warning light right in front of their faces. To overcome this challenge, the wingman concept is used in manned aircraft and the RQ-11B (i.e. two operators).

References
Marshall, D.M., Barnhart, R.K., Shappee, E., & Most, M.T. (2016). Introduction to Unmanned      Aircraft Systems, Second Edition. Boca Raton: CRC Press. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/erau/detail.action?docID=4710295
McHale, J. (2010). Ground control stations for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) are becoming        networking-hub cockpits on the ground for U.S. unmanned forces. Retrieved from http://www.militaryaerospace.com/articles/2010/06/ground-control-stations.html
Rudaski, E. (2014). Drone Strikes. Hauppauge: Nova Science Publishers, Inc. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/erau/detail.action?docID=3024053

Wasserbly, D. (2009). US Army’s Raven datalinks to go digital. International Defense Review,         42(9). Retrieved from http://janes.ihs.com.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/International         DefenceReview/DisplayFile/idr12401?edition=2009

Comments