Novel patterns of visual-vestibular intersensory stimulation often result in symptoms of simulator sickness, raising health and safety concerns regarding virtual environment exposure. Two experiments investigated the effect of conflicting visual-vestibular cues on subjective reports of simulator sickness during and after a 50-min exposure to a head-coupled virtual interface. Virtual image scale factors (0.5. 1.0, 2.0 magnification, generated by varying geometric field of view angle) were investigated in Experiment 1, and additional system time delays (125, 250 ms) were investigated in Experiment 2. Simulator sickness metrics included spoken self-reports during exposure and simulator sickness questionnaires (pre-exposure, immediate postexposure, and 20 min postexposure). Head yaw angular position data were also recorded. Reports of simulator sickness symptoms were significantly greater in the minification (0.5) and magnification (2.0) image scale factor conditions than in the neutral condition (1.0). Simulator sickness did not vary with changes in time delay, however. Furthermore, a comparison across experiments suggests no appreciable increase in simulator sickness with increasing time delays above the nominal value (48 ms). Head angular position data exhibited certain systematic variations across conditions. Actual or potential applications of this research include virtual environment training, simulation, and entertainment systems.

Remotely operated vehicles (ROVs) are vehicular robotic systems that are teleoperated by a geographically separated user. Advances in computing technology have enabled ROV operators to manage multiple ROVs by means of supervisory control techniques. The challenge of incorporating telepresence in any one vehicle is replaced by the need to keep the human “in the loop” of the activities of all vehicles. An evaluation was conducted to compare the effects of automation level and decision-aid fidelity on the number of simulated remotely operated vehicles that could be successfully controlled by a single operator during a target acquisition task. The specific ROVs instantiated for the study were unmanned air vehicles (UAVs). Levels of automation (LOAs) included manual control, management-by-consent, and management-by-exception. Levels of decision-aid fidelity (100% correct and 95% correct) were achieved by intentionally injecting error into the decision-aiding capabilities of the simulation. Additionally, the number of UAVs to be controlled varied (one, two, and four vehicles). Twelve participants acted as UAV operators. A mixed-subject design was utilized (with decision-aid fidelity as the between-subjects factor), and participants were not informed of decision-aid fidelity prior to data collection. Dependent variables included mission efficiency, percentage correct detection of incorrect decision aids, workload and situation awareness ratings, and trust in automation ratings. Results indicate that an automation level incorporating management-by-consent had some clear performance advantages over the more autonomous (management-by-exception) and less autonomous (manual control) levels of automation. However, automation level interacted with the other factors for subjective measures of workload, situation awareness, and trust. Additionally, although a 3D perspective view of the mission scene was always available, it was used only during low-workload periods and did not appear to improve the operator's sense of presence. The implications for ROV interface design are discussed, and future research directions are proposed.

A consortium of government, industry and academia is currently working to establish minimum operational performance standards for Detect and Avoid (DAA) and Control and Communications (C2) systems in order to enable broader integration of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) into the National Airspace System (NAS). One subset of these performance standards will need to address the DAA display requirements that support an acceptable level of pilot performance. From a pilot's perspective, the DAA task is the maintenance of self separation and collision avoidance from other aircraft, utilizing the available information and controls within the Ground Control Station (GCS), including the DAA display. The pilot-in-the-loop DAA task requires the pilot to carry out three major functions: 1) detect a potential threat, 2) determine an appropriate resolution maneuver, and 3) execute that resolution maneuver via the GCS control and navigation interface(s). The purpose of the present study was to examine two main questions with respect to DAA display considerations that could impact pilots' ability to maintain well clear from other aircraft. First, what is the effect of a minimum (or basic) information display compared to an advanced information display on pilot performance? Second, what is the effect of display location on UAS pilot performance? Two levels of information level (basic, advanced) were compared across two levels of display location (standalone, integrated), for a total of four displays. The authors propose an eight-stage pilot-DAA interaction timeline from which several pilot response time metrics can be extracted. These metrics were compared across the four display conditions. The results indicate that the advanced displays had faster overall response times compared to the basic displays, however, there were no significant differences between the standalone and integrated displays. Implications of the findings on understanding pilot performance on the DAA task, the development of DAA display performance standards, as well as the need for future research are discussed.

No abstract