The Feasibility of Remotely Piloted Aircrafts for VOR Flight Inspection

• Published in: Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) Vol. 20; no. 7; p. 1947
• Main Authors: de Oliveira Costa, Diogo, Oliveira, Neusa Maria Franco, d'Amore, Roberto
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Switzerland MDPI AG 31.03.2020; MDPI
• Subjects: Aircraft accidents & safety; Automatic pilots; Aviation; Certification; Experiments; flight inspection system; Flight tests; Ground stations; Hardware-in-the-loop simulation; ICAO; Inspection; Inspections; Misalignment; NavAid; Preventive maintenance; Regulations; RPA; Simulation; unmanned aerial systems; Unmanned aerial vehicles; Very high frequencies; VOR; Waypoints; RPA; flight inspection system; drones; VOR; ICAO; UAV; unmanned aerial systems; NavAid
• ISSN: 1424-8220; 1424-8220
• DOI: 10.3390/s20071947

This article analyzes the use of Remotely Piloted Aircrafts (RPA) in VOR (Very High Frequency Omnidirectional Range) flight inspection. Initially, tests were performed to check whether the Autopilot Positioning System (APS) met the regulatory requirements. The results of these tests indicated that the APS provided information within the standard regulations. A Hardware in the Loop (HIL) platform was implemented to perform flight tests following the waypoints generated by a mission automation routine. One test was performed without introducing disturbance into the proposed test platform. The other four tests were performed introducing errors in latitude and longitude in the APS into the platform. The errors introduced had the same characteristics as those measured in the initial tests, in order for the simulation tests to be as similar as possible to the real situation. The tests performed with positioning errors only did not lead to false misalignment detection. However, introducing positioning errors and a 4° VOR misalignment error, a misalignment of 3.99° was observed during the flight test. This is a value greater than the maximum one allowed by the regulations, and the system indicates the VOR misalignment. Five flight inspection tests were performed. In addition to the APS errors, tests with a modulation error were also conducted. Introducing a 4° VOR misalignment in conjunction with modulation error, a misalignment of 4.02° was observed, resulting in successful misalignment detection.