View Item 

Show simple item record

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

dc.contributor.authorKim, Sang‐hwanen_US
dc.contributor.authorKaber, David B.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-07-03T14:41:25Z
dc.date.availableWITHHELD_13_MONTHSen_US
dc.date.available2014-07-03T14:41:25Z
dc.date.issued2014-07en_US
dc.identifier.citationKim, Sang‐hwan ; Kaber, David B. (2014). "Examining the Effects of Conformal Terrain Features in Advanced Headâ Up Displays on Flight Performance and Pilot Situation Awareness." Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries 24(4): 386-402.en_US
dc.identifier.issn1090-8471en_US
dc.identifier.issn1520-6564en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/107518
dc.description.abstractSynthetic 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. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.en_US
dc.publisherWiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Companyen_US
dc.subject.otherEnhanced Vision Systems (EVS)en_US
dc.subject.otherFlight Performanceen_US
dc.subject.otherPilot SAen_US
dc.subject.otherSynthetic Vision Systems (SVS)en_US
dc.subject.otherHead‐Up Display (HUDen_US
dc.titleExamining the Effects of Conformal Terrain Features in Advanced Head‐Up Displays on Flight Performance and Pilot Situation Awarenessen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelNatural Resources and Environmenen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelScienceen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumDepartment of Industrial and Manufacturing Systems Engineering, University of Michigan‐Dearborn, Dearborn, MI 48128en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherEdward P. Fitts Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/107518/1/20501_ftp.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/hfm.20501en_US
dc.identifier.sourceHuman Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industriesen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePrinzel, L. J., Hughes, M. F., Arthur, J. J., & Kramer, L. J. ( 2003 ). Synthetic vision CFIT experiments for GA and commercial aircraft:''A picture is worth a thousand live''. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 47th Annual Meeting. Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAbbott, T. S., & Rogers, W. H. ( 1993 ). Functional categories for human‐centered flight deck design. In Proceedings of the 12th Digital Avionics Systems Conference (pp. 66 – 74 ), October 25–28, 1993, Fort Worth, Texas.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAlexander, A. L., Wickens, C. D., & Hardy, T. J. ( 2003 ). Examining the effects of guidance symbology, display size, and field of view on flight performance and situation awareness. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 47th Annual Meeting. Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceArthur, J. J., Kramer, L. J., & Bailey, R. E. ( 2005 ). Flight test comparison between Enhanced Vision (FLIR) and Synthetic Vision Systems. In Proceedings of Enhanced and Synthetic Vision (SPIE), 5802, 25 – 36.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBailey, R. E., Kramer, L. J., & Prinzel, L. J. ( 2007 ). Fusion of synthetic and enhanced vision for all‐weather commercial aviation operations. In North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Human Factors and Medicine Symposium on Human Factors and Medical Aspects of Day/Night All Weather Operations: Current Issues and Future Challenges, Tech. Rep. No. NATO RTO‐HFM‐141, Neuilly‐sur‐Seine, France, RTO, pp. 11 – 1‐11 –18.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBolton, M. L., Bass, E. J., & Comstock, J. R. ( 2007 ). Spatial awareness in synthetic vision systems: Using spatial and temporal judgments to evaluate texture and field of view. Human Factors, 49 ( 6 ), 961 – 974.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceByrne, M. D., Kirlik, A., Fleetwood, M. D., Huss, D. G., Kosorukoff, A., Lin, R., et al.( 2004 ). A closed‐loop, ACT‐R approach to modeling approach and landing with and without synthetic vision system (SVS) technology. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 48th Meeting. Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEndsley, M. R. ( 1995 ). Measurement of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors, 37, 65 – 84.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEtherington, T. J., Vogl, T. L., Lapis, M. B., & Razo, J. G. ( 2000 ). Synthetic vision information system. In Proceedings of the 19th Digital Aviation Systems Conference. Philadelphia, PA, 2A4/1 – 2A4/8.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJones, D. G., & Kaber, D. B. ( 2004 ). Situation awareness measurement and the situation awareness global assessment technique (Chapter 42). In N. Stanton (Eds.), Handbook of Human Factors Methods London: Taylor & Francis, 419 – 428.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKaber, D. B., Alexander, A., Kaufmann, K., Kim, S.‐H., Naylor, J. T., & Entin, E. ( 2009 ). Testing and validation of a psychophysically defined metric of display clutter (Final Report: NASA Langley Research Center Grant. #NNL06AA21A). Hampton, VA: NASA Langley Research Center.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKeller, J., Leiden, K., & Small, R. ( 2003 ). Cognitive task analysis of commercial jet aircraft pilots during instrument approaches for baseline and synthetic vision displays. In D. C. Foyle, A. Goodman, & B. L. Hooey (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2003 Conference on Human Performance Modeling of Approach and Landing with Augmented Displays (NASA/CP‐ 2003‐212267), 15 – 69 Moffett Field, CA: NASA.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKim, S.‐H., Prinzel, L. J., Kaber, D. B., Alexander, A. L., Stelzer, E. M., Kaufmann, K., et al.( 2011 ). Multimodal measure of display clutter and pilot performance for advanced head‐up display. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 82 ( 10 ), 1013 – 1022.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLeiden, K., Keller, J. W., & French, J. W. ( 2001 ). Context of human error in commercial aviation. (Technical Report). Boulder, CO: Micro Analysis and Design, Inc.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePrinzel, L. J., Arthur, J. J., Kramer, L. J., & Bailey, R. E. ( 2004 ). Pathway concepts experiment for head‐down synthetic vision displays. In Proceedings of the SPIE, Enhanced and Synthetic Vision 2004. Vol. 5424‐02. Jacques G. Verly (Ed.). Orlando, Florida.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSchnell, T., Ellis, K., & Etherington, T. ( 2005 ). Flight simulator evaluation of an integrated synthetic and enhanced vision system for terrain avoidance. In Proceedings of the 24th Digital Avionics Systems Conference, October 30 – November 3, 2005, Washington, D.C. 2005.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSchnell, T., Kwon, Y., Merchant, S., & Etherington, T. ( 2004 ). Improved flight technical performance in flight decks equipped with synthetic vision information system display. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 14, 79 – 102.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSnow, M. P., & Reising, J. M. ( 1999 ). Effect of pathway‐in‐the‐sky and synthetic terrain imagery on situation awareness in a simulated low‐level ingress scenario. In Proceedings of the 4th Annual Symposium on Situation Awareness in the Tactical Air Environment, Patuxent River, MD, 198 – 207.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceThomas, L. C., & Wikens, C. D. ( 2004 ). Eye‐tracking and individual differences in off‐normal even detection when flying with a synthetic vision system display. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 48th Annual Meeting. Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVervers, P. M., & Wickens, C. D. ( 1998 ). Head‐up displays: Effects of clutter, display intensity, and display location on pilot performance. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 8 ( 4 ), 377 – 403.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWickens, C. D. ( 2002 ). Situation awareness and workload in aviation. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 128 – 133.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWickens, C. D., Alexander, A. L., Horrey, W. J., Nune, A., & Hardy, T. J. ( 2004 ). Traffic and flight guidance depiction on a synthetic vision system display: The effects of clutter on performance and visual attention allocation. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 48th Annual Meeting. Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWickens, C. D., & Hollands, J. G. ( 2000 ). Engineering psychology and human performance ( 3rd ed. ). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
20501_ftp.pdf
Size:
724.0KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.