Performance comparison between a head-worn display system and a head-up display for low visibility commercial operations

Jarvis J. Arthur III; Lawerence J. Prinzel III; James R. Barnes; Steven P. Williams; Denise R. Jones; Stephanie J. Harrison; Randall E. Bailey

doi:10.1117/12.2048700

13 June 2014 Performance comparison between a head-worn display system and a head-up display for low visibility commercial operations

Jarvis J. Arthur III, Lawerence J. Prinzel III, James R. Barnes, Steven P. Williams, Denise R. Jones, Stephanie J. Harrison, Randall E. Bailey

Author Affiliations +

Proceedings Volume 9086, Display Technologies and Applications for Defense, Security, and Avionics VIII; and Head- and Helmet-Mounted Displays XIX; 90860N (2014) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2048700
Event: SPIE Defense + Security, 2014, Baltimore, MD, United States

Abstract

Research, development, test, and evaluation of flight deck interface technologies is being conducted by NASA to proactively identify, develop, and mature tools, methods, and technologies for improving overall aircraft safety of new and legacy vehicles operating in Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen). Under the Vehicle Systems Safety Technologies (VSST) project in the Aviation Safety Program, one specific area of research is the use of small Head-Worn Displays (HWDs) as an equivalent display to a Head-Up Display (HUD). Title 14 of the US Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 91.175 describes a possible operational credit which can be obtained with airplane equipage of a HUD or an "equivalent" display combined with Enhanced Vision (EV). If successful, a HWD may provide the same safety and operational benefits as current BUD-equipped aircraft but for significantly more aircraft in which HUD installation is neither practical nor possible. A simulation experiment was conducted to evaluate if the HWD, coupled with a head-tracker, can provide an equivalent display to a HUD. Comparative testing was performed in the Research Flight Deck (RFD) Cockpit Motion Facility (CMF) full mission, motion-based simulator at NASA Langley. Twelve airline crews conducted approach and landing, taxi, and departure operations during low visibility operations (1000' Runway Visual Range (RVR), 300' RVR) at Memphis International Airport (Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) identifier: KMEM). The results showed that there were no statistical differences in the crews performance in terms of touchdown and takeoff. Further, there were no statistical differences between the HUD and HWD in pilots' responses to questionnaires.

Citation Download Citation

Jarvis J. Arthur III, Lawerence J. Prinzel III, James R. Barnes, Steven P. Williams, Denise R. Jones, Stephanie J. Harrison, and Randall E. Bailey "Performance comparison between a head-worn display system and a head-up display for low visibility commercial operations", Proc. SPIE 9086, Display Technologies and Applications for Defense, Security, and Avionics VIII; and Head- and Helmet-Mounted Displays XIX, 90860N (13 June 2014); https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2048700

ACCESS THE FULL ARTICLE

INSTITUTIONAL
Select your institution to access the SPIE Digital Library.

SELECT YOUR INSTITUTION

PERSONAL
Sign in with your SPIE account to access your personal subscriptions or to use specific features such as save to my library, sign up for alerts, save searches, etc.

PERSONAL SIGN IN

No SPIE Account? Create one

PURCHASE THIS CONTENT

SUBSCRIBE TO DIGITAL LIBRARY

50 downloads per 1-year subscription

Members: $195

Non-members: $335 ADD TO CART

25 downloads per 1 - year subscription

Members: $145

Non-members: $250 ADD TO CART

PURCHASE SINGLE ARTICLE

Includes PDF, HTML & Video, when available