Low level flight performance, and air combat maneuvering performancein a simulator with a fiber optic helmet mounted display system

Kruk, Ronald V.; Runnings, D.

doi:10.2514/6.1989-3287

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For successful performance of activities or tasks involving dorsal stream functioning, such as visual orientation to peripheral stimulation, controlling the position of a moving vehicle relative to the position of other vehicles (e.g., formation flying), or perceiving a full sense of immersion, a field of view much greater than 60°would likely be needed. Kruk and Runnings (1989), for example, stated that a field of view of 127°is required for flight simulation applications. However, a large field of view may create problems related to simulator sickness and/or postural instability.…”

Section: Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They also found that the accuracy in dropping bombs improved when the field of view was larger. In a study involving low-altitude flight, Kruk and Runnings (1989) varied field of view from 87°to 564 Fall 2006 -Human Factors 127°and found that the subjective workload of pilots was substantially higher with a limited field of view. Moreover, significant increases in maneuvering time were found for formation flying as field of view was decreased, presumably because of a lack of motion cuing and a reduced horizon reference.…”

Section: Restricted Field Of Viewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Perceptual Issues in the Use of Head-Mounted Visual Displays

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing this collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY)2. REPORT TYPE 3. DATES COVERED (From -To) SPONSORING / MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S)AFRL; AFRL/HEA SPONSOR/MONITOR'S REPORT NUMBER(S) Air Force Research Laboratory Human Effectiveness Directorate Warfighter Readiness Research Division 6030 South Kent Street Mesa AZ 85212-6061 AFRL-HE-AZ-TP-2007-03 DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY STATEMENTApproved for public release; distribution is unlimited. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTESThis paper was originally published in the journal Human Factors (Volume 48, Fall 2006). ABSTRACTObjective: We provide a review and analysis of much of the published literature on visual perception issues that impact the design and use of head-mounted displays (HMDs). Background: Unlike the previous literature on HMDs, this review draws heavily from the basic vision literature in order to help provide insight for future design solutions for HMDs. Method: Included in this review are articles and books found cited in other works as well as articles and books obtained from an Internet search. Results: Issues discussed include the effect of brightness and contrast on depth of field, dark focus, dark vergence, and perceptual constancy; the effect of accommodation/vergence synergy on perceptual constancy, eyestrain, and discomfort; the relationship of field of view to the functioning of different visual pathways and the types of visualmotor tasks mediated by them; the relationship of binocular input to visual suppression; and the importance of head movements, head tracking, and display update lag. Conclusion: This paper offers a set of recommendations for the design and use of HMDs. Application: Consideration of the basic vision literature will provide insight for future design solutions for HMDs.

show abstract

Section: Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Restricted Field Of Viewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceptual Issues in the Use of Head-Mounted Visual Displays

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Experiments examining field of view (Kruk & Runnings, 1989) with the CAE fiber-optic helmet mounted display (FOHMD) did not find statistically reliable differences in performance during various low altitude flight tasks as field of view was varied (127, 107, and 87 degrees). However, the pilots all indicated that workload while performing maneuvers in the limited field of view conditions was substantially higher.…”

Section: Field Of Viewmentioning

confidence: 97%

Helmet-Mounted Displays for Use in Air Force Training and Simulation

Winterbottom¹,

Patterson²,

Pierce³

2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing this collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY) SPONSORING / MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S)AFRL; AFRL/HEA SPONSOR/MONITOR'S REPORT NUMBER(S)Air ABSTRACTThis report provides a review and analysis of the published literature on head-mounted displays (HMDs). In particular, we discuss several key perceptual issues that are relevant to the use of HMDs. The issues discussed are: (1) brightness and contrast; (2) accommodationvergence synergy; (3) field of view; (4) binocular input; and (5) head movements. This review of the literature is intended to anticipate and solve perceptual issues associated with two particular HMD applications: (1) simulation of off-bore sight (OBS) targeting and (2) full fieldof-view out-the-window (OTW) simulation for deployable flight training. Additionally, several technology issues important to the continued development of HMDs are discussed. This report concludes with a set of recommendations for the design and use of HMDs for OBS and OTW flight training applications.

show abstract

“…They also found that the accuracy in dropping bombs improved when the FOV was larger. In a study involving low-altitude flight, Kruk and Runnings (1989) varied FOV from 87°to 127°and found that the subjective workload of pilots was substantially higher with a limited field of view. Moreover, significant increases in maneuvering time were detected for formation flying as FOV was decreased, presumably due to a lack of motion cuing and a reduced horizon reference.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Field of View Requirements for Deployable Training Systems: Effect of Field of View on Roll Control

Winterbottorn

Patterson

Gaska³

et al. 2008

Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Maintaining training proficiency during long combat deployments has become an important issue in recent years, and therefore the requirement for deployable training devices has also increased in importance. These training systems must not only deliver high fidelity, but must meet stringent requirements for reduced size for transportability and ease of set-up and operation. We describe an experiment examining the effect of reduced field of view on the control of a roll disturbance. Results indicated that, for control of roll angle, there was little change in performance for fields of view greater than 40 degrees. This finding provides evidence that field of view may be reduced in deployable systems without adversely affecting training effectiveness, at least for some essential capabilities.

show abstract

Low level flight performance, and air combat maneuvering performancein a simulator with a fiber optic helmet mounted display system

Cited by 8 publications

References 1 publication

Perceptual Issues in the Use of Head-Mounted Visual Displays

Perceptual Issues in the Use of Head-Mounted Visual Displays

Helmet-Mounted Displays for Use in Air Force Training and Simulation

Field of View Requirements for Deployable Training Systems: Effect of Field of View on Roll Control

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About