629.053:623.592.(045)

remote pilot; speed and quality of flight task planning; flight controller interfaces; ground control station; main screen; controller operating modes; interface evaluation criteria; weight coefficients of the i-th criterion

Planning a flight task by a remote pilot is a very important stage in the process of preparing a flight of an unmanned aerial vehicle. The smallest mistakes made at the same time can lead to irreparable consequences for both the UAV and others. The number of remote pilot errors can be reduced by reducing the speed of flight task planning. However, in actual operation, this can slow down flight preparation and, as a result, reduce the efficiency of the process as a whole. Among other things, the speed of flight planning is influenced by the user interface itself, which is a means of communication between the remote pilot and the machine – the on-board flight controller It is known that human-machine communication interfaces are very diverse, but in general they should contribute to the smooth and error-free entry of the input information into the memory of the machine (flight controller), which will later serve as a guide for the machine in its actions. At the same time, there is insufficient evidence to apply quantitative interface assessments (assessments of means, rules and methods and techniques) to already known flight controllers. The paper presents the results of the analysis and research of the user interfaces of two flight controllers according to the criteria of ease of data entry during planning, the total number of operations during the planning of all flight stages, and the amount of work performed within each operation, as well as the level of visualization (display) of information on the monitor of the ground control station of the unmanned aerial vehicle. Relative weighting factors based on rating methods were applied to each of the mentioned criteria. After taking into account the results of the evaluation, the ratings of such dispatchers as Pixhawk and Veronte were established.

1. Matiychyk M. P., Prusov D. E., Mykhatsky O. Y. Comparative Analysis of Avionics Samples and Components due to Developing a Methodology of the UAV Integrated Avionics Synthesis. Proceedings of the National Aviation University. 2017. No. 1 (70). P. 73–87.
2. Mission Planner. URL: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/p/mission-planner/9nblggh4tx29?activetab= pivot:overviewtab.
3. ArduPilot. URL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArduPilot.
4. [Reliable Control Systems. Fully autonomous control for unmanned vehicles. URL: https://www. embention.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/veronte-autopilot-brochure.pdf.
5. Docs. Veronte Autopilot. Mission. URL: https://manuals.embention.com/Veronte_Autopilot/en/latest/ mission-configuration/index.html.
6. Matiychyk M. P., Mykhatsky O. Y. Estimation of the main flight-technical characteristics of the unmanned plane M6-3T for carriage of small valuable cargoes. ProceedingsoftheNationalAviationUniversity. 2020. Vol. 83. No. 2 (2020). Р. 37–48. URL: http://jrnl.nau.edu.ua/index.php/visnik/issue/view/776.
7. Embention. Veronte Autopilot. Chapter 8. Mission. P. 487–501. URL: https://manuals.embention.com/ Veronte_Autopilot/en/latest/index.html.
8. Delov V. A., Fashchev V. V.. The relevance of the correct placement of weight coefficients in the tasks of classifying radar targets. ISSN 2542-0542 Bulletin of the Almaz-Antey Concern VKO No. 2. 2017. P. 56–60.
9. Korobov V. B. Comparative analysis of methods for determining the weight coefficients of «influencing factors». Sociology: methodology, methods, mathematical modeling (4M), 2005. No. 20. Р. 54–73.

1. Matiychyk M. P., Prusov D. E., Mykhatsky O. Y. Comparative Analysis of Avionics Samples and Components due to Developing a Methodology of the UAV Integrated Avionics Synthesis. Proceedings of the National Aviation University. 2017. No. 1 (70). P. 73–87.
2. Mission Planner. URL: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/p/mission-planner/9nblggh4tx29?activetab= pivot:overviewtab.
3. ArduPilot. URL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArduPilot.
4. [Reliable Control Systems. Fully autonomous control for unmanned vehicles. URL: https://www. embention.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/veronte-autopilot-brochure.pdf.
5. Docs. Veronte Autopilot. Mission. URL: https://manuals.embention.com/Veronte_Autopilot/en/latest/ mission-configuration/index.html.
6. Matiychyk M. P., Mykhatsky O. Y. Estimation of the main flight-technical characteristics of the unmanned plane M6-3T for carriage of small valuable cargoes. ProceedingsoftheNationalAviationUniversity. 2020. Vol. 83. No. 2 (2020). Р. 37–48. URL: http://jrnl.nau.edu.ua/index.php/visnik/issue/view/776.
7. Embention. Veronte Autopilot. Chapter 8. Mission. P. 487–501. URL: https://manuals.embention.com/ Veronte_Autopilot/en/latest/index.html.
8. Delov V. A., Fashchev V. V.. The relevance of the correct placement of weight coefficients in the tasks of classifying radar targets. ISSN 2542-0542 Bulletin of the Almaz-Antey Concern VKO No. 2. 2017. P. 56–60.
9. Korobov V. B. Comparative analysis of methods for determining the weight coefficients of «influencing factors». Sociology: methodology, methods, mathematical modeling (4M), 2005. No. 20. Р. 54–73.