Prediction and Quickening In Perspective Flight Displays for Curved Landing Approaches

Abstract

In an empirical test of various prediction and quickening display algorithms, 18 professional pilot-subjects made four curved-path landing approaches in a GAT-2 simulator using each of 18 dynamically different display configurations in a within-subject design. Results Indicate that second-and third-order predictor displays provide the best lateral performance. Intermediate levels of prediction and quickening provide best vertical control. Prediction quickening algorithms of increasing computational order significantly reduce aileron, rudder, and elevator control responses, reflecting successive reductions in cockpit work load. Whereas conventional crosspointer displays are not adequate for curved landing approaches, perspective displays with predictors and some vertical dimension quickening are highly effective.

Automatic information processing and high-performance skills: Principles of consistency, part-task training, context, retention, and complex task performance.

“…Their results showed improved performance relative to subjects originally trained on the compensatory displays. Although these results are generally supported by other investigators (e.g., Jensen, 1979;Roscoe, Saad, & Jensen, 1979) contradictory findings also appear in the literature (e.g., Briggs & Rockway, 1966;Simon & Roscoe, 1981) Wightman and Sistrunk (1987) used a simplification technique to measure carrier landing final approach skills. By reducing the gross weight of the simulator, they achieved a reduced lag between a control input and the perceptible responses.…”

A Componential Analysis of Pilot Decision-Making

“…Analysis of FAA aircraft reports by Jensen and Benel (1977) suggested that errors in pilot judgment accounted for over 50% of pilot fatalities during the period from 1970-74. Yet despite this importance, pilot decision making has received only a minimum degree of research interest (for exceptions see Buch & de Bagheera, 1985;Buch & Diehl, 1984;Jensen, 1981;Lester, Diehl, & Buch, 1985). Nor has pilot judgment benefited from the sophisticated modeling approaches characteristic of the manual control field.…”

Glideslope Descent-Rate Cuing to Aid Carrier Landings

“…The pilot is more directly in control of rate than of displacement, so that he could correct the rate error if he were aware of it before a substantial displacement error had developed. One popular technique for enhancing tracking performance, known as quickening, is to add to the displayed error one or more of its derivatives (Jensen, 1979;McCormick, 1970;Clement, McRuer and Klein, 1972). This can enhance tracking performance by reducing the delay between system response and displayed system error.…”

“…While there are abundant theories and data to indicate that first-order information would aid performance of a task such as glideslope tracking (Jensen 1979, McCormick 1970, Pew, 1966, Purand, 1967, the data obtained…”