An Improvement of Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems by Identifying Potential Radio-Controlled Areas

  • Olena KozhokhinaEmail author
  • Roman Odarchenko
  • Liudmyla Blahaia
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1126)


Remotely piloted aircraft systems are a new component of the aviation system and based on cutting-edge developments in aerospace technologies. Research has shown that the responsibilities of the operator of remotely piloted aircraft systems could be over-specified and often deal with extensive information. This paper aims to determine how to keep a sufficient level of information component of the reliability of the operator. In this context, methods of human operator reliability improving were considered. Based on a review of the literature on human factors, it was determined that redundancy could increase the reliability of human-operator. The results indicate that there are hardware, information, algorithmic and time redundancy. On this basis, it is recommended to use the identification of potential radio-controlled areas as algorithmic redundancy for the operator. Further research is needed to identify other factors that could strengthen the effectiveness and reliability of the operator.


Remotely piloted aircraft systems Reliability Operator Aviation safety Information unload and overload Remote pilot 5G 


  1. 1.
    Reliability theory of ATC systems. Methodical instructions on the study subjects and control tasks, p. 38 (2011). (in Russian), St. PetersburgGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Swain, A.D.: Accident Sequence Evaluation Program Human Reliability Analysis Procedure. US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC (1987)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Technical Basis and Implementation Guidelines for a Technique for Human Event Analysis (ATHEANA), Washington DC (2000)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Embrey, D.E., Kirwan, B.: A comparative evaluation of three subjective human reliability quantification techniques. In: Coombes, K. (ed.) The Annual Ergonomics Society Conference Proceedings, pp 137–142. Taylor and Francis, London (1983)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Taniguchi, A., Onosato, M.: Effect of continuous improvement on the reporting quality of project management information system for project management success. IJITCS 10(1), 1–15 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bell, J., Holroyd, J.: Review of human reliability assessment methods. In: Health and Safety Executive, Buxton, pp. 1–90 (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Reer, B.: Conclusions from occurrences by descriptions of actions (CODA). In: Drottz Sjöberg, B.M. (ed.) New Risk Frontiers, Proceedings of the 1997 Annual Meeting of the Society for Risk Analysis-Europe, Stockholm (1997)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sträter, O.: The use of incidents for human reliability management. Safety Reliab. 26(2), 26–47 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Embrey, D.E., Humphreys, P., Rosa, E.A., Kirwan, B. Rea, K.: SLIM-MAUD: an approach to assessing human error probabilities using structured expert judgment, volume I: Overview of SLIM-MAUD. Prepared for the US NRC (1984)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kozhokhina, O., Gribov, V., Rudas, S.: Analytical model of air navigation system operator reliability. In: IEEE 3rd International Conference on Methods and System of Navigation and Motion Control (MSNMC), Proceedings, Kyiv, pp. 170–174 (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kozhokhina, O., Gribov, V. Rudas, S.: Structural reliability of air traffic controllers. In: Proceedings of the National Aviation University, Kyiv, vol. 4, no. 61, pp. 50–56 (2014)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lomov, V.: Dovidnyk z inzhenernoyi psykholohiyi, «Mashynobu-duvannya» , Moscow, p. 368 (1982). (In Russian)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kozhokhina, O., Blahaia, L., Rudas, S., Alexeiev, O.: Informational reliability of radar system operator. In: 17th International Radar Symposium (IRS), Krakow (2016)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bell, J., Holroyd, J.: Review of human reliability assessment methods. In: Health and Safety Executive, Buxton, pp. 1–90 (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Alvarenga, M.A.B., Frutuoso, E.M.P.F., Fonseca, R.A.: A critical review of methods and models for evaluating organizational factors in human reliability analysis. Prog. Nucl. Energy 75, 25–41 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mitomo, N., Hashimoto, A., Homma, K.: An example of an accident analysis of aircraft based on a human reliability analysis method. In: 2015 4-th International Conference on Informatics, Electronics and Vision, Fukuoka, 15–18 June, p. 1–5 (2015)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lin, Y., Pan, X., He, C.: Human reliability analysis in carrier-based aircraft recovery procedure based on CREAM. In: Proceedings of 2015 the 1-st International Conference on Reliability Systems Engineering, Beijing, 21–23 October, p. 1–6 (2015)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chen, W., Huang, S.: Human reliability analysis for visual inspection in aviation maintenance by a Bayesian network approach. Transp. Res. Rec. 2449, 105–113 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Manual on RPAS/Doc 10019-AN/507 ICAO, P. 190 (2015)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Odarchenko, R.S., Mirutenko, L.V., Dakov, S.: Yu: An improved method for building a LTE support segment. Knowl. Based Technol. 37(1), 18–26 (2018)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hadidi, M.A., Al-Azzeh, J.S., Tkalich, O.P., Gnatyuk, S.O., Khokhlachova, Y.Y.: Zigbee, bluetooth and Wi-Fi complex wireless networks performance increasing. Int. J. Commun. Antenna Propag. 7(1), 48–56 (2017)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Odarchenko, R., Al Hadidi, M., Al-Azzeh, J.S., Gnatyuk, S., Abakumova, A.: Adaptive regulation of radiated power radio transmitting devices in a modern cellular network, depending on climatic conditions. Contemp. Eng. Sci. 9(10), 473–485 (2016)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Odarchenko, R.S.: Estimation of the probability of bit error and bandwidth of channels of antenna MIMO-systems. Problems of creation, testing, commissioning and operation of complex information systems: Sb. Sciences work Zhytomyr: ZhVI NAU, Vip. 2. pp. 57–67 (2012)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Prokys, J.: Digital Communication/Proc. J/Per. from English D. D. Klovsky Moscow, p. 800 (2000)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gradshtein, I., Ryzhik, I.: Tables of integrals, sums, series, and works. Moscow (1971)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pierce D.: Symbols, signals, noises. Patterns and processes of information transfer, Moscow, p. 338 (1967). (in Russian)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Maguire, R.: Validating a process for understanding human error probabilities in complex human-computer interfaces. In: Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Complexity in Design, p. 81–89, Glasgow (2005)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Nagar, R., Gupta, D.K., Singh, R.M.: Time effective workflow scheduling using genetic algorithm in cloud computing. Int. J. Inf. Technol. Comput. Sci. (IJITCS) 10(1), 68–75 (2018)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Egejuru, N.C., Ogunlade, O., Idowu, P.A.: Development of a mobile-based hypertension risk monitoring system. Int. J. Inf. Eng. Electron. Bus. (IJIEEB) 11(4), 11–23 (2019)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Olena Kozhokhina
    • 1
    Email author
  • Roman Odarchenko
    • 1
  • Liudmyla Blahaia
    • 1
  1. 1.National Aviation UniversityKievUkraine

Personalised recommendations