Design of a Single Pilot Cockpit for Airline Operations
description
Transcript of Design of a Single Pilot Cockpit for Airline Operations
DESIGN OF A SINGLE PILOT COCKPIT FOR AIRLINE OPERATIONSJonathan Graham, Chris Hopkins, Andrew Loeber, Soham Trivedi
2
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
3
Agenda Context Stakeholder Analysis Problem & Need Requirements Design Alternatives Simulation & Methodology Results Recommendation Project Management
Scope Large Commercial Air Transportation
Passenger and Cargo Carriers Carriers With Operating Revenue >$20 Million Domestic Operations
US Airspace National Airspace System (NAS) ATC FAA Regulatory Body
Financial data adjusted for inflation to 2012 dollars
Flight safety is maintained4
5
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
-40,000,000,000.00
-30,000,000,000.00
-20,000,000,000.00
-10,000,000,000.00
0.00
10,000,000,000.00
20,000,000,000.00
Profit/Loss for Major Air Carriers
Profit/LossNet Income
Year
Dol
lars
(Bi
llion
s)
[1]
Bankruptcies Filed
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
6
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
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
0.0020,000,000,000.0040,000,000,000.0060,000,000,000.0080,000,000,000.00
100,000,000,000.00120,000,000,000.00140,000,000,000.00160,000,000,000.00180,000,000,000.00200,000,000,000.00
Projected Total Operating Expense for Major Air Carriers
Year
Ope
ratin
g Ex
pens
e (B
illio
ns)
Total Op-erating Expense
Projected Total Op-erating Expense
[2]
7
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
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.00
% Operations Expense for Major Air Carriers
% Pilot% Fuel% Dir Maint% Air Ops
Year
% O
pera
tions
Cos
t[3]
[3] BTS Schedule P5.2*Values are inflation adjusted to 2012 based on consumer price index
8
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]
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
01000020000300004000050000600007000080000
Projected Pilots
Year
Pilo
ts (
Thou
sand
s)[4]
Total Pilots
Projected Supply
Projected Pilot De-mand
9
The cost per pilot has a period of decline from 2000-2008 Slowly increasing at present Pay schedules established for salary increases
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
0.0020,000.0040,000.0060,000.0080,000.00
100,000.00120,000.00140,000.00160,000.00180,000.00 Cost Per Pilot
Cost Per Pilot
Year
Cost
(Th
ousa
nds)
[5] & [6]
Industry Prof-itable Industry In De-
cline & Salary Negotiation
Cost Increasing
[6] BTS Schedule P10[7] BTS Schedule P5.2*Values are inflation adjusted to 2012 based on consumer price index
10
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
11
Navigator
Radio Operator
Flight EngineerCo-Pilot?
Is a Single Pilot Cockpit the Next Step?
12
The Flight Deck Two pilots operate the aircraft
Pilot Flying Flies the Aircraft Confirms Callouts
Pilot Not Flying 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
13
Cockpit Avionics1st Officer’s Instrument Panel
Center Instrument Panel
MCP
Overhead PanelMCDU
14
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)
15
Procedure
Tasks
Actions
A procedure is decomposed by tasks and physical/cognitive actions that are required to execute a task
FCOM Codifies Procedures 63 Procedures 613 Total Tasks 737 Total Actions
Procedures are decomposed to identify potential reallocation of actions to a design alternative
Procedure Decomposition
16
Example Procedure
1717
04080
120160
Action Frequencies
PFPNFB/P
PF40%
PNF55%
B/P5%
% Actions by Pilot
18
Agenda Background & Context Stakeholder Analysis Problem & Need Requirements Design Alternatives Simulation & Methodology Results Recommendation Project Management
19
Stakeholder Interactions
19
Support SPC
Reserved about SPC
Oppose SPC
20
StakeholderGroup
PrimaryObjectives Tension with SPC
Regulatory Agencies(FAA, DoT)
• Maximize:• Flight safety• Consumer
protection
A SPC would inherently introduce new risks and decrease overall flight safety, leading regulatory agencies to withhold their approval
Aviation Workforce (Pilots, Pilots’ Unions, ATC, ATC
Unions)
• 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
Customer Base• 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
Aviation Industry(Air Carriers, Management, Manufactures, Insurance, &
Airports)
• 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
20
21
Agenda Background & Context Stakeholder Analysis Problem & Need Design Alternatives Simulation & Methodology Results Recommendation Project Management
22
Problem Statement Rising operating expense contributes to
financial instability in commercial aviation Profitability is difficult to achieve
Pilot labor shortage predicted
23
GAP Analysis
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4Operating Revenue to Operating Expense Ratio
Ra...
Year
Ratio
*BTS Schedule P5.2
*Values are inflation adjusted to 2012 based on consumer price index
Target Ratio
24
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
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
Two Pilot Cockpit
Two Pilot Cockpit
with Alternative
Single Pilot Cockpit
Evaluation of
Alternative 25
Today
+10-15 Years
+20-30 Years
+40 Years
Organization
Tension to be Mitigated Benefit to Slow Phase-In
Regulatory Agencies
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.
Aviation Workforce
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
27
Agenda Background & Context Stakeholder Analysis Problem & Need Requirements Design Alternatives Simulation & Methodology Results Recommendation Project Management
RequirementsRequirement 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
29
Agenda Background & Context Stakeholder Analysis Problem & Need Requirements Design Alternatives Simulation & Methodology Results Recommendation Project Management
30
Design Alternatives1. Two Pilot Cockpit (No Change)2. Single Pilot with No Support3. Onboard Procedure Support System4. Remote Ground Pilot Terminal
31
Physical Process Diagram
SystemStart Aircraft State
Procedures
Target Aircraft State
Flight Goal
Pilots
32
Integration Concept
Onboard Alternativ
eRemote
Alternative
1st Officer’s Instrument PanelCenter Instrument Panel
MCP
Overhead PanelMCDU
33
No Change to current two pilot system Nothing is modified from operating
manual
Baseline Two Pilot Cockpit
Single Pilot No Automation
Procedure Support System
Ground Pilot Terminal
34
Remove the co-pilot and transfer all the procedures to the remaining pilot
No new systems supporting the single pilot
Baseline Two Pilot Cockpit
Single Pilot No Procedure Support
Procedure Support System
Ground Pilot Terminal
35
Baseline Two Pilot Cockpit
Single Pilot No Procedure Support
Procedure Support System
Ground Pilot Terminal
All PNF tasks moved to the PF
Eliminate callouts
36
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
Baseline Two Pilot Cockpit
Single Pilot No Procedure Support
Procedure Support System
Ground Pilot Terminal
37
Baseline Two Pilot Cockpit
Single Pilot No Procedure Support
Procedure Support System
Ground Pilot Terminal
Some PNF actions taken over by automation
Used for situational awareness for PF during a procedure
38
Ground pilot monitors flight and interacts with ATC on behalf of the airplane
No control capability Requires specialized
ground networks and infrastructure
Baseline Two Pilot Cockpit
Single Pilot No Procedure Support
Procedure Support System
Ground Pilot Terminal
39
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
40
Agenda Background & Context Stakeholder Analysis Problem & Need Requirements Design Alternatives Simulation & Methodology Results Recommendation Project Management
41
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
42
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
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
43
SimulationProcedure Model Processing Time
44
AnalysisReplications
Procedural Simulation Formulas
Simulation
𝑃 𝑖=∑𝑗=1
𝑙
𝑇 𝑗𝐴𝑃𝑇=𝒘𝑷=∑𝑖=1
𝑘
𝑤𝑖𝑃 𝑖 𝑇 𝑗=∑𝑚=1
𝑜
𝐴𝑚𝐴𝑚 ln (𝑁 (𝜇 ,𝜎 2 ))
𝑃 𝑖=𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑐𝑒𝑑𝑢𝑟𝑒𝐴𝑃𝑇=𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑇 𝑗=𝑡𝑎𝑠𝑘
𝐴𝑚 U (a ,b)𝐴𝑚 Tri (c ,d ,e )𝐴𝑚=𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑤𝑖=𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑐𝑒𝑑𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑙 h𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔 𝑡
44𝑅𝑒𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠≥( 𝑍 𝛼
2
∗𝑆0
𝜀 )2 𝑡= 𝐴𝑃𝑇𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙−𝐴𝑃𝑇 𝐴𝑙𝑡
√ 𝑠12
𝑁 1+𝑠2
2
𝑁2 𝑅𝑒𝑗𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑖𝑓 :𝑃>0.05𝐻1 : 𝐴𝑃𝑇 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙< 𝐴𝑃𝑇 𝐴𝑙𝑡
𝐻0 : 𝐴𝑃𝑇𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙≥𝐴𝑃𝑇 𝐴𝑙𝑡
Input Output
Alternative
Procedures Tasks Action Times
Alternative Processing
TimesSingle
Pilot No Support
P1…PnT1m…Tnm
Lognormal~A1r…Amr TBD
Two Pilot P1…PnT1o…Tno
Lognormal~A1r…Aor TBD
Procedure Support System
P1…Pn T1p…TnpLognormal~A1r
…Apr
Uniform~A1r…Apr TBD
Ground Pilot
TerminalP1…Pn
T1q…Tnq
Lognormal~A1r…Aqr
Triangular~A1r…Aqr
TBD
Design of Experiment
45
46
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
Business Case Formulas
47
Cost Formulas
𝐸 [ 𝐴𝐿𝐶 ]=𝐶𝐴𝑙𝑡+∑𝑡=1
𝑁 𝐶𝑃𝑖𝑙𝑜𝑡
(1+𝑑 )𝑡+∑𝑡=1
𝑁 𝐶 h𝑂𝑡 𝐿𝑎𝑏𝑜𝑟
(1+𝑑 )𝑡+∑𝑡=1
𝑁 𝐶𝑀𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑡
(1+𝑑 )𝑡
𝐶 h𝑂𝑡 𝐿𝑎𝑏𝑜𝑟= h𝑂𝑡 𝑒𝑟 𝐿𝑎𝑏𝑜𝑟 𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡𝑠𝐶𝑃𝑖𝑙𝑜𝑡=𝑃𝑖𝑙𝑜𝑡 𝐿𝑎𝑏𝑜𝑟 𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡𝐶𝐴𝑙𝑡=𝐴𝑙𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡𝐶𝑀𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑡=𝐴𝑖𝑟𝑐𝑟𝑎𝑓𝑡𝑀𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡𝑠
𝑑=𝐼𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑡
48
Design of ExperimentInput 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)
49
Value HierarchySingle Pilot
Utility
TRLAlternative Processing
TimeSafety Profitabilit
yMaintenan
ce
In ScopeOut of Scope
Training Liability Usability
Agenda Background & Context Stakeholder Analysis Problem & Need Requirements Design Alternatives Simulation & Methodology Results Recommendation Project Management
50
51
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
52
Agenda Background & Context Stakeholder Analysis Problem & Need Requirements Design Alternatives Simulation & Methodology Results Recommendation Project Management
53
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
Two Pilot Cockpit
Two Pilot Cockpit
with Alternative
Single Pilot Cockpit
Evaluation of
Alternative
Today
+10-15 Years
+20-30 Years
+40 Years
54
Agenda Background & Context Stakeholder Analysis Problem & Need Requirements Design Alternatives Simulation & Methodology Results Recommendation Project Management
55
Work Breakdown
56
Schedule
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
58
RiskRisk Description Mitigation Rating
Simulation Complexity
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.
Plan to devote significant work to simulation during the winter break period. Simulation
coding started ahead of schedule.
Likelihood: LikelyImpact: Major
Procedure ComplexityThe number of procedures to be modeled is very
large and takes significant resources due to manual nature of input.
Plan to make baseline model and make simplifications to existing structure rather
than re-authoring all procedures.
Likelihood: LikelyImpact: Major
Busy Co-Sponsor NASA Ames researcher has been unavailable to support project.
Working with other sponsors to get additional resources.
Likelihood: LikelyImpact: Minor
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.
Likelihood: Very Likely
Impact: Major
59
Budgeting Parameters $50.00 base hourly rate $106.38 hourly rate w/ GMU overhead
factor Estimate 701 hours Budgeted Cost of $74,574.47
60
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132333435363738-$10,000.00
$10,000.00
$30,000.00
$50,000.00
$70,000.00
$90,000.00
$110,000.00
EVM
EVPVACWorst CaseBest Case
Week
Dol
lars
Faculty Presentations
Conferences
Final Proposal
Final Draft
Abstract &
Manuscript
61
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
CPI / SPI
CPISPI
Week
Ratio
62
Questions?
63
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
[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/2013-2033/media/2013_Forecast.pdf
[10] Inflation CPI Source http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/
[5] WSJ Airlines Face Acute Shortage of Pilots http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052970203937004578079391643223634#articleTabs%3Darticle
[11] US Pilot Labor Supply http://www.faa.gov/news/conferences_events/aviation_forecast_2010/agenda/media/GAF%20Jim%20Higgins%20and%20Kent%20Love.pdf
64
Backup
65
Passenger demand increase of 30% projected over next 10 years [8]
Commercial aviation under pressure to meet demand while achieving profitability
65
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
0200,000,000400,000,000600,000,000800,000,000
1,000,000,0001,200,000,000
Projected Passenger Miles
DomesticTotal
Year
Pass
enge
r M
iles
(Bill
ions
)[7]
[8] BTS T-100 Market & Segment[9] FAA Aerospace Forecast FY2013-2033*Values are inflation adjusted to 2012 based on consumer price index
Cost Model
66
Input DescriptionAverage Fleet Age The average fleet age as timeframe for lifecycle
of “typical” aircraftAverage Pilot Cost Yearly pilot cost based on average pay
schedules with pay increaseAlternative Investment
The expected cost per unit to deploy alternative
Interest Rate of forgoing alternative investmentsOther Aircraft Operating Expenses
Operating expense for aircraft as reported through BTS treated as random variates
Alternatives Satisfying Requirements
Mission Requirement
Single Pilot No Support
Two Pilots Task Support System
Ground Pilot Terminal
Task Load X TBD TBDReliability X TBDOperating Expense TBD TBD TBD
Lifecycle Cost
TBD TBD TBD
67
6868
Decompose tasks into Excel Select roles and cognitive functions
Visual Instrument Inspection Visual Environment Inspection Verbal Callout Physical Instrument Manipulation Etc.
6969
Parse Excel spreadsheet into an XML schema
Hierarchy of tasks captured by XML
Parsed into simulation