Search Results

Cockpit Display System (CDS) suppliers need to now prepare for the cockpits of the future. The architecture, design and ergonomics of the cockpits have to be re-assessed in order to place the pilot at the center of the system, while taking into account the increasing complexity of the systems. Human Machine Interfaces (HMI) have to be simplified and made more intuitive. Thus, there is a need for dedicated HMI design tools and human-factor-oriented processes that are able to support both the required flexibility in the display creation for various types of interactive displays and the increasing demand for safety in avionics displays. This paper presents a COTS approach to these needs, which combines the SCADE Display model-based HMI software design solution, designed from the ground up for displays with safety objectives, with an associated prototyping and development process largely based upon human factors assessment.

The ARINC 661 standard [1] defines a Cockpit Display System (CDS) interface intended for all types of aircrafts installations. This paper presents an integrated solution based on Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) tools that allows, in the initial stage of an aircraft project, support for the expression of requirements with regards to the CDS definition and the CDS interaction with the User Applications (UAs). It also enables prototyping of the systems architecture from the point of view of functionalities and performance. At a later stage of the project, this same integrated tool suite can be used to produce and certify the final embedded software code within the CDS and to generate the communication code between the CDS and the UAs.

Historically, the majority of avionics display manufacturers have sought custom solutions to support the development of cockpit displays, head-up displays and other avionics on-board and ground displays, from specification through to target. This was however a decision borne out necessity rather than choice since the inherent wisdom of a ‘commercial-off-the-shelf’ (COTS) approach had been understood and demonstrated in other parallel domains for some time. So, with this in mind, why was a more costly custom approach selected?