&lt;title&gt;Flight test comparison between enhanced vision (FLIR) and synthetic vision systems&lt;/title&gt;

Arthur, Jarvis J.; Kramer, Lynda J.; Bailey, Randall E.

doi:10.1117/12.604363

Cited by 16 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…NASA studies 4,5 have confirmed that pilots find clutter on the HUD particularly objectionable because it reduces their ability to see the real world. HUD-specific video content requirements for EVS and SVS are discussed in later sections.…”

Section: Video Content Challengesmentioning

confidence: 80%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Challenges with displaying enhanced and synthetic vision video on a head-up display

Howells

Brown

2007

SPIE Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Displaying video on a head-up display from an Enhanced Vision System camera or Synthetic Vision System engine presents some unique challenges not seen on conventional head-down flight deck displays. All information displayed on the HUD has to be seen against a background that can vary from bright sunlight to a dark night sky. The video has to include enough grayshade information to support visual identification of runway features and the image shown on the HUD has to be visually aligned to the real world accurately enough to support low-visibility operations at airports. The pilot needs to clearly see the image on the HUD but also needs to see the real world through the display when it can be seen with the naked eye. In addition, the video display cannot interfere with the display of existing flight information symbology.

show abstract

Section: Video Content Challengesmentioning

confidence: 80%

“…The views on the HDDs can be full color and feature rich. On the HUD, studies 4,5 have found that the SVS view must be minimized to provide the required information -terrain cues, obstacles, etc. -without obscuring the outside scene.…”

Section: Video Content Challenges -Svsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges with displaying enhanced and synthetic vision video on a head-up display

Howells

Brown

2007

SPIE Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Because SVS features are generated from a database, they have the potential disadvantage of providing pilots with inaccurate information relative to the actual state of the terrain. Consequently, the use of a combination of SVS and EVS displays was suggested (Arthur, Kramer, & Bailey, 2005). Research has investigated the utility of SVS and EVS terrain features rendered in an HDD versus pilot use of conventional flight instrument displays (Schnell, Ellis, & Etherington, 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining the Effects of Conformal Terrain Features in Advanced Head‐Up Displays on Flight Performance and Pilot Situation Awareness

Kim

Kaber

2012

Hum Ftrs & Erg Mfg Svc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Synthetic vision systems (SVS) render terrain features for pilots through cockpit displays using a GPS database and three-dimensional graphical models. Enhanced vision systems (EVS) present infrared imagery of terrain using a forward-looking sensor in the nose of an aircraft. The ultimate goal of SVS and EVS technologies is to support pilots in achieving safety under low-visibility and night conditions comparable to clear, day conditions. This study assessed pilot performance and situation awareness (SA) effects of SVS and EVS imagery in an advanced head-up display (HUD) during a simulated landing approach under instrument meteorological conditions. Videos of the landing with various HUD configurations were presented to eight pilots with a superimposed tracking task. The independent variables included four HUD feature configurations (baseline [no terrain imagery], SVS, EVS, and a combination of SVS and EVS), two visibility conditions, and four legs of the flight. Results indicated that SVS increased overall SA but degraded flight path control performance because of visual confusion with other display features. EVS increased flight path control accuracy but decreased system (aircraft) awareness because of visual distractions. The combination of SVS and EVS generated offsetting effects. Display configurations did not affect pilot spatial awareness. Flight performance was not different among phases of the approach, but levels and types of pilot SA did vary from leg to leg. These results are applicable to development of adaptive HUD features to support pilot performance. They support the use of multidimensional measures of SA for insight on pilot information processing with advanced aviation displays. C 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

show abstract

“…While some may consider the technologies to be competing; they are, in fact, complementary. 5 SVS, by virtue of being weather-independent and unlimited in field-of-regard, holds many advantages over enhanced vision sensor systems for providing terrain, path, and obstacle awareness, particularly during flight phases, such as approach, which may be obscured by clouds and precipitation of which an EVS sensor cannot penetrate. Recognition of terrain and cultural features may also be improved over an EVS since the display presentation is optimized by the display designer, not the product of the sensor and its environment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Crew and display concepts evaluation for synthetic/enhanced vision systems

2006

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

NASA's Synthetic Vision Systems (SVS) project is developing technologies with practical applications that strive to eliminate low-visibility conditions as a causal factor to civil aircraft accidents and replicate the operational benefits of clear day flight operations, regardless of the actual outside visibility condition. Enhanced Vision System (EVS) technologies are analogous and complementary in many respects to SVS, with the principle difference being that EVS is an imaging sensor presentation, as opposed to a database-derived image. The use of EVS in civil aircraft is projected to increase rapidly as the Federal Aviation Administration recently changed the aircraft operating rules under Part 91, revising the flight visibility requirements for conducting operations to civil airports. Operators conducting straight-in instrument approach procedures may now operate below the published approach minimums when using an approved EVS that shows the required visual references on the pilot's Head-Up Display. An experiment was conducted to evaluate the complementary use of SVS and EVS technologies, specifically focusing on new techniques for integration and/or fusion of synthetic and enhanced vision technologies and crew resource management while operating under the newly adopted FAA rules which provide operating credit for EVS. Overall, the experimental data showed that significant improvements in SA without concomitant increases in workload and display clutter could be provided by the integration and/or fusion of synthetic and enhanced vision technologies for the pilot-flying and the pilot-not-flying.

show abstract

<title>Flight test comparison between enhanced vision (FLIR) and synthetic vision systems</title>

Cited by 16 publications

References 6 publications

Challenges with displaying enhanced and synthetic vision video on a head-up display

Challenges with displaying enhanced and synthetic vision video on a head-up display

Examining the Effects of Conformal Terrain Features in Advanced Head‐Up Displays on Flight Performance and Pilot Situation Awareness

Crew and display concepts evaluation for synthetic/enhanced vision systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About