Visual issues associated with the use of the integrated helmet and display sighting system (IHADSS) in the Apache helicopter: three decades in review

Hiatt, Keith L.; Rash, Clarence E.; Heinecke, Kevin

doi:10.1117/12.774499

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The Pulfrich effect is a particular binocular visual illusion whereby an object moving in a plane parallel to the observer appears to approach or recede from the viewer, and is noticeable when there is difference in luminance presented to each eye, exactly the situation if observing an object through an image intensifier via one eye and through the unaided eye simultaneously (38) (Fig. 5).…”

Section: Binocular Rivalrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Visual aspects of advanced sensors and helmet-mounted displays

Morgan-Warren

Woodcock

2014

Aeronaut. j. (1968)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Visually coupled systems such as helmet mounted displays are designed to improve aircrew situational awareness by providing timely flight, targeting and other information overlaid on real or sensor-derived views of the external environment. Data can be presented in monocular, biocular or binocular fashion and are associated with visual conflicts and potential ophthalmic problems. Restricted sensor spectrum, limits of resolution, inherent system latency, the displaced visual input from remote sensors and restricted field of view may contribute to ophthalmic symptoms in aircrew. Disruption to binocularity and reliance on monocular cues for depth perception and hyperstereopsis from sensor-induced convergence disparity may cause distance estimation problems, whereas inappropriate accommodative stimuli and ocular dominance factors are common causes of eyestrain. Binocular rivalry from discordant imagery to each eye may compromise visual performance via several mechanisms. This article discusses the potential visual problems associated with visually coupled systems and the challenges of integrating complex systems with the aircrew interface.

show abstract

Section: Binocular Rivalrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Visual aspects of advanced sensors and helmet-mounted displays

Morgan-Warren

Woodcock

2014

Aeronaut. j. (1968)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Each screen is capable of projecting a different image, one directly to each corresponding eye, thus creating a dichoptic display for BR (e.g., Sony HMZ-T1, zSight TM , Occulus Rift by Occulus VR TM ; eMagin z800 3DVisor used in Huang et al, 2012; see also Mizuno et al, 2012;Travers, 2008). In military and aviation settings, various types of HMDs, also known as helmet-mounted displays, are used under applied conditions in which the occurrence of BR is considered problematic (Haitt et al, 2008;Melzer, 2007;Patterson et al, 2007;Temme et al, 2009).…”

Section: Time-multiplexed Techniques -Liquid Crystal Shutter Gogglesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dichoptic Viewing Methods for Binocular Rivalry Research: Prospects for Large-Scale Clinical and Genetic Studies

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Binocular rivalry (BR) is an intriguing phenomenon that occurs when two different images are presented, one to each eye, resulting in alternation or rivalry between the percepts. The phenomenon has been studied for nearly 200 years, with renewed and intensive investigation over recent decades. The rate of perceptual switching has long been known to vary widely between individuals but to be relatively stable within individuals. A recent twin study demonstrated that individual variation in BR rate is under substantial genetic control, a finding that also represented the first report, using a large study, of genetic contribution for any post-retinal visual processing phenomenon. The twin study had been prompted by earlier work showing BR rate was slow in the heritable psychiatric condition, bipolar disorder (BD). Together, these studies suggested that slow BR may represent an endophenotype for BD, and heralded the advent of modern clinical and genetic studies of rivalry. This new focus has coincided with rapid advances in 3D display technology, but despite such progress, specific development of technology for rivalry research has been lacking. This review therefore compares different display methods for BR research across several factors, including viewing parameters, image quality, equipment cost, compatibility with other investigative methods, subject group, and sample size, with a focus on requirements specific to large-scale clinical and genetic studies. It is intended to be a resource for investigators new to BR research, such as clinicians and geneticists, and to stimulate the development of 3D display technology for advancing interdisciplinary studies of rivalry.

show abstract

“…[4][5][6] In their review of thirty years of operational use of a monocular helmet-mounted display, Hiatt and collaborators report that pilots have experienced physical and visual symptoms such as headaches, blurred or distorted vision, and visual illusions that occur while using the display and in some cases persist for some time after use. 5 HWDs have also been found to affect attentional switching between the information displayed on the lens and that available only in the outside world. 6 A proposed justification for using monocular instead of biocular or binocular units has been that only one eye is presented with Continued on next page…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%