Three-Dimensional Navigation and Integrated Hazard Display in Advanced Avionics: Performance, Situation Awareness, and Workload

127 p.Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2005.In Experiment 2, twenty-four pilots flew a series of approaches while, during simulation freezes, estimating the outside world locations of queried traffic represented in the same IHD formats compared in the first experiment when the display was either present or blank. Overall, the 3D exocentric display appeared to be the worst display format in terms of supporting SA, deploying visual attention for the betterment of performance, and detecting the presence of an off-normal event. A speed-accuracy tradeoff was again observed between the two SA measurement techniques. In Experiment 3, twenty-four pilots flew a series of approaches while detecting changes to surrounding traffic aircraft and weather cell icons under varying workload levels, although only the 2D coplanar and split-screen views were examined. Findings indicated that the 2D coplanar display was better in supporting flightpath tracking and change detection performance when compared to the split-screen format. These findings have implications for both the design of an IHD in terms of display format, and the evaluations which lead to the recommendations therein. In summary, across three experiments we found that the 2D coplanar IHD appears to be best at supporting both traffic awareness and change detection within an SVS context.U of I OnlyRestricted to the U of I community idenfinitely during batch ingest of legacy ETD