Human Machine Interface Issues for Drone Fleet Management

  • Salvatore LuongoEmail author
  • Marianna Di Gregorio
  • Giuliana Vitiello
  • Angela Vozella
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 876)


The use of Unmanned Aerial Systems, commonly called drones, today is massively growing. Drones can be remotely piloted (RPAS - Remotely Piloted Aircraft System) or they can automatically fly. Recently applications are emerging which require the use of fleet of drones and a related human machine interface to ensure better performance and reliability. Safety in those system is a priority aspect. A major cause for accidents involving drones is ground operators’ error, due to poorly designed user interfaces. Therefore, the interest in human factors arises with the aim of contributing to the maintenance of high safety standards of flight missions through the systematic application of usability principles during the development of the inter-faces. The present work reports on an ongoing study meant to design Ground Control Station interfaces for multiple RPAS control, with the goal to enhance operators’ performance and increase the probability of mission success.


Unmanned Aerial Systems User Centered Design Human factors Safety Adaptive interfaces 


  1. 1.
    Cooke, N.J., Pringle, H.L., Pedersen, H.K., Connor, O.: Human factors of remotely operated vehicles. In: Salas, E (ed.) Advances in Human Performance and Cognitive Engineering Research, vol. 7 (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    McCarley, J.S., Wickens, C.D.: Human Factors Concern in UAV Flight. Institute of Aviation, Aviation Human Factors Division, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Williams, K.W.: A summary of Unmanned Aircraft Accident/Incident Data: Human Factors Implications, Civil Aerospace Medical Institute, Federal Aviation Administration, Oklahoma City, OK 73125, December 2004Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sheridan, T.B.: Human and Automation. Wiley, Santa Monica (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tso, K.S., Tharp, G.K., Zhang, W., Tai, A.T.: A multi-agent operator interface for unmanned aerial vehicles. In: Proceedings of the 18th Digital Avionics Systems Conference, St. Louis, MO, pp. 6.A.4.1–6.A.4.8, October 1999Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wickens, C.D., Lee, J.D., Liu, Y., Becker, S.G.: An Introduction to Human Factors Engineering, 2nd edn. Pearson, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey (1998)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Draper, M., Calhoun, G., Ruff, H., Williamson, D., Barry, T.: Manual versus speech input for unmanned aerial vehicle control station operations. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 47th Annual Meeting, pp. 109–113 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sabikan, S., Nawawi, S.W.: Open-source project (OSPs) platform for outdoor quadcopter. J. Adv. Res. Des. 24, 13–27 (2016)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Qian, G.M., Pebrianti, D., Chun, Y.W., Hao, Y.H., Bayuaji, L.: Waypoint navigation of quad-rotor MAV. In: 2017 7th IEEE International Conference on System Engineering and Technology (ICSET), Shah Alam, pp. 38–42 (2017)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Salvatore Luongo
    • 1
    Email author
  • Marianna Di Gregorio
    • 2
  • Giuliana Vitiello
    • 2
  • Angela Vozella
    • 1
  1. 1.Italian Aerospace Research CenterCapuaItaly
  2. 2.Dipartimento di InformaticaUniversità degli Studi di SalernoFisciano, SalernoItaly

Personalised recommendations