Evaluation of head-worn and head-up displays for use in enhanced flight vision system operations

Abstract. Research, development, test, and evaluation of flight deck interface technologies is being conducted by NASA to proactively identify, develop, and mature tools, methods, and technologies for improving aviation safety of new and legacy vehicles operating in the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen). One specific area of research was the use of small head-worn displays (HWDs) to serve as a possible equivalent to a head-up display (HUD) for commercial aircraft. A simulation experiment was conducted to evaluate if the HWD can provide an equivalent level of performance to a HUD. Airline flight crews conducted simulated approach and landing operations during low visibility operations. The results showed that there were no statistical differences in flight crews’ performance in terms of flight technical error suggesting that the HWD may serve as an equivalent display to the HUD. Further, the HWD may have several advantages over a HUD making its adoption an attractive alternative for commercial flight deck implementation. Technical hurdles remain to be overcome for complete display equivalence including, most notably, the end-to-end latency of the HWD system. The results and conclusions taken from the results of the high fidelity simulation experiment are described and offer future research directions.

[1]  Bob DeMers,et al.  Head Worn Display System for Equivalent Visual Operations , 2009 .

[2]  Thomas W. Frey,et al.  Virtual HUD using an HMD , 2001, SPIE Defense + Commercial Sensing.

[3]  Randall E. Bailey,et al.  Enhanced Flight Vision Systems and Synthetic Vision Systems for NextGen Approach and Landing Operations , 2013 .

[4]  Randall E. Bailey,et al.  Head-worn displays for NextGen , 2011, Defense + Commercial Sensing.

[5]  J. Rolland,et al.  Head-worn displays: a review , 2006, Journal of Display Technology.

[6]  Desmond M. Connolly Aviation visual perception: research, misperception and mishaps , 2011 .

[7]  Randall E. Bailey,et al.  Latency requirements for head-worn display S/EVS applications , 2004, SPIE Defense + Commercial Sensing.

[8]  Michael A. Vidulich,et al.  Testing a Subjective Metric of Situation Awareness , 1991 .

[9]  James E. Evans,et al.  Analysis of Delay Causality at Newark International Airport , 2001 .

[10]  Randall E. Bailey Head-up display (HUD) lessons learned for helmet-mounted display (HMD) development , 1994, Defense, Security, and Sensing.

[11]  Volker Gollnick,et al.  The Benefit of Innovative Taxi Concepts: The Impact of Airport Size, Fleet Mix and Traffic Growth , 2013 .

[12]  William B Albery Multisensory cueing for enhancing orientation information during flight. , 2007, Aviation, space, and environmental medicine.

[13]  Randall E. Bailey,et al.  Assessing Dual Sensor Enhanced Flight Vision Systems to Enable Equivalent Visual Operations , 2016 .

[14]  L. J. Kramer,et al.  Motion-base simulator evaluation of an aircraft using an eXternal Vision System , 2012, 2012 IEEE/AIAA 31st Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC).

[15]  Randall E. Bailey,et al.  Design and testing of an unlimited field-of-regard synthetic vision head-worn display for commercial aircraft surface operations , 2007, SPIE Defense + Commercial Sensing.

[16]  C. E. Rash,et al.  Helmet-mounted Displays: Sensation, Perception, and Cognition Issues , 2009 .

[17]  Randall E. Bailey,et al.  Visual advantage of enhanced flight vision system during NextGen flight test evaluation , 2014, Defense + Security Symposium.

[18]  Randall E. Bailey,et al.  Enhanced vision for all-weather operations under NextGen , 2010, Defense + Commercial Sensing.

[19]  Randall E. Bailey,et al.  Part-task simulation of synthetic and enhanced vision concepts for lunar landing , 2010, Defense + Commercial Sensing.

[20]  Randall E. Bailey,et al.  Head-Worn Display Concepts for Surface Operations for Commerical Aircraft , 2008 .

[21]  Jarvis J. Arthur,et al.  Synthetic vision enhanced surface operations and flight procedures rehearsal tool , 2006, SPIE Defense + Commercial Sensing.

[22]  Robert S. Bolia,et al.  ASSESSING SIMULATOR SICKNESS IN A SEE-THROUGH HMD: EFFECTS OF TIME DELAY, TIME ON TASK, AND TASK COMPLEXITY , 2000 .

[23]  Robert S. Kennedy,et al.  Simulator Sickness Questionnaire: An enhanced method for quantifying simulator sickness. , 1993 .

[24]  Lawrence L Ames,et al.  Revision and Verification of a Seven-Point Workload Estimate Scale , 1993 .

[25]  Randall E. Bailey,et al.  Review of head-worn displays for the Next Generation Air Transportation System , 2017 .

[26]  Sarah Barber,et al.  Head Up and Eyes Out Enabling Equivalent Visual Operations with the Head Up Display , 2013 .

[27]  Walter J. Riker A Review of J , 2010 .