{"title":"Head-up display symbology for ground collision avoidance","authors":"G. Billingsley, J. Kuchar, S. W. Jacobson","doi":"10.1109/DASC.1999.863732","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Four ground collision avoidance displays were tested using a fixed-base T-38 simulator with a projection screen and simulated head-up display (HUD). When given a standard Break-X, pilots were able to spend only 40% of the flight time between desired altitudes and crashed in 20% of the runs. Horizontally- and vertically-moving chevron symbols allowed 70% and 80% of the flight time to be spent at the desired altitude respectively and resulted in a crash in 8% of the runs. A preview depiction using a perspective elevated surface at the desired altitude was the best display for the task investigated, allowing 90% of the time to be spent at the desired altitude with a crash rate of 2%.","PeriodicalId":269139,"journal":{"name":"Gateway to the New Millennium. 18th Digital Avionics Systems Conference. Proceedings (Cat. No.99CH37033)","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gateway to the New Millennium. 18th Digital Avionics Systems Conference. Proceedings (Cat. No.99CH37033)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/DASC.1999.863732","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11
Abstract
Four ground collision avoidance displays were tested using a fixed-base T-38 simulator with a projection screen and simulated head-up display (HUD). When given a standard Break-X, pilots were able to spend only 40% of the flight time between desired altitudes and crashed in 20% of the runs. Horizontally- and vertically-moving chevron symbols allowed 70% and 80% of the flight time to be spent at the desired altitude respectively and resulted in a crash in 8% of the runs. A preview depiction using a perspective elevated surface at the desired altitude was the best display for the task investigated, allowing 90% of the time to be spent at the desired altitude with a crash rate of 2%.