Electronic maps for terminal area navigation: effects of frame of reference and dimensionality.

Two experiments are reported that contrast rotating versus fixed electronic map displays, which pilots used for a simulated approach to a landing. In Experiment 1, a rotating versus fixed-map display was experimentally crossed with a two-dimensional (2D) versus three-dimensional (3D) view (perspective map) as pilots' ability to maintain the flight path and demonstrate awareness of the location of surrounding terrain features were assessed. Rotating displays supported better flight path guidance and did not substantially harm performance on terrain awareness tasks. 3D displays led to a substantial cost for vertical control but did not differ from 2D displays in lateral control. In Experiment 2, pilots flew with the rotating 2D display and with an improved version of the rotating 3D display, designed to reduce the ambiguity of representing altitude information. Vertical control improved as a result of the 3D display design improvement, but lateral control did not. The results are discussed in terms of the costs and benefits of presenting information in 3D, ego-referenced format for both flight path control and terrain awareness.

[1]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  When Users Want What's not Best for Them , 1995 .

[2]  L D Silverstein,et al.  Spatial Judgments with Monoscopic and Stereoscopic Presentation of Perspective Displays , 1992, Human factors.

[3]  Daniel L. Baty.  Evaluating a CRT Map Predictor for Airborne Use , 1976, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[4]  Richard E. Spradlin.  Modern air transport flight deck design , 1987 .

[5]  S R Ellis,et al.  The Effect of Perspective Geometry on Judged Direction in Spatial Information Instruments , 1986, Human factors.

[6]  James B. Robertson,et al.  Experimental Evaluation of a Perspective Tunnel Display for Three-Dimensional Helicopter Approaches , 1981 .

[7]  E Theunissen.  INFLUENCE OF ERROR GAIN AND POSITION PREDICTION ON TRACKING PERFORMANCE AND CONTROL ACTIVITY WITH PERSPECTIVE FLIGHT PATH DISPLAYS. , 1995 .

[8]  Richard S. Jensen,et al.  Prediction and Quickening In Perspective Flight Displays for Curved Landing Approaches , 1981 .

[9]  Anthony J. Aretz.  The Design of Electronic Map Displays , 1991 .

[10]  Patrick Péruch,et al.  Acquisition of Spatial Knowledge Through Visual Exploration of Simulated Environments , 1995 .

[11]  Arthur J. Grunwald.  Tunnel display for four-dimensional fixed-wing aircraft approaches , 1984 .

[12]  R. John Hansman,et al.  Experimental Study of Electronically Based Instrument Approach Plates , 1994 .

[13]  Mica R. Endsley,et al.  Measurement of Situation Awareness in Dynamic Systems , 1995, Hum. Factors.

[14]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Display Formatting Techniques for Improving Situation Awareness in the Aircraft Cockpit , 1991 .

[15]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  A Comparison of Methods for Promoting Geographic Knowledge in Simulated Aircraft Navigation , 1996, Hum. Factors.

[16]  J. A. Anthony,et al.  The Mental Rotation of Map Displays , 1992 .

[17]  C.D. Wickens,et al.  Ergonomic design for perspective flight-path displays , 1989, IEEE Control Systems Magazine.

[18]  Robert C. Williges,et al.  Motion Relationships in Aircraft Attitude and Guidance Displays: A Flight Experiment , 1975 .