The Joint Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Experiment Program consists of British and Israeli contractors working together controlling the UAV for experimental purposes during a Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR) training exercise at Fallon Naval Air Station (NAS), Nevada (NV), during exercise DESERT RESCUE XI. Here two British contractors view a low-resolution strip map, which covers a large area provided by the electrical optical and infrared camera, installed in the UAV during a surveillance and reconnaissance mission. The exercise is a joint service Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR) training exercise hosted by the Naval Strike and Warfare Center, designed to simulate downed aircrews, enabling CSAR related missions to experiment with new techniques in realistic scenarios.
The Joint Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Experiment Program consists of British and Israeli contractors working together controlling the UAV for experimental purposes during a Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR) training exercise at Fallon Naval Air Station (NAS), Nevada (NV), during exercise DESERT RESCUE XI. Here two British contractors view a low-resolution strip map, which covers a large area provided by the electrical optical and infrared camera, installed in the UAV during a surveillance and reconnaissance mission. The exercise is a joint service Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR) training exercise hosted by the Naval Strike and Warfare Center, designed to simulate downed aircrews, enabling CSAR related missions to experiment with new techniques in realistic scenarios. SSGT REYNALDO RAMON, USAF
SHARE

Consider it a case of putting the drone before the driver. As drone use has taken off, human error remains a leading cause of unmanned aerial vehicle crashes. The problem is that drones are currently controlled by many different mechanisms, from joysticks to mouse-and-keyboard configurations to touchscreen interfaces. This variety introduces more opportunities for mistakes, especially when multiple important controls are placed in close proximity.

A new article in the journal of Ergonomics in Design suggests a simple solution: better ergonomics. The report recommends that drone-pilot workspaces be configured in accordance with the blandly named “ANSI/HFES 100-2007 human factors standard”, a guide to which can be purchased for $340 (you can read a rough overview here.) Basically, the authors argue that drone controls should be standardized, and they should look like a regular computer setup.

To illustrate what can go wrong when drone controls get too complicated, the report details an incident in which a drone operator, using a joystick, missed the landing gear button and instead killed the engine, causing the drone to stop flying and plummet out of the sky.

As early as 2005, a study of UAV crashes suggested that improved interfaces may reduce the number of accidents. The fact is, there’s no reason to fly a drone with a joystick. That is a holdover from Air Force practices, and while it makes a lot of sense for an on-board pilot, so much of drone flight is automated that simpler, human-proof interfaces are better. Hence the recommendation of workplace ergonomic standards–while the drones themselves are more complicated than regular cube farm tasks, piloting them shouldn’t be. Adopting and adapting to the mundane of an office might be the least cool thing for drone pilots to do, but it’s also the most fiscally responsible.

Kelsey D. Atherton
Kelsey D. Atherton

Kelsey D. Atherton is a military technology journalist who has contributed to Popular Science since 2013. He covers uncrewed robotics and other drones, communications systems, the nuclear enterprise, and the technologies that go into planning, waging, and mitigating war.

Aviation
Drones