Initial experiences with Aero Glass

O

onwards

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Messages
1,998
Location
CA
Display Name
Display name:
onwards
This is a crosspost from the internal forums for the Aero Glass beta testers.

For some comments that are not included below: I do like the technology, and the glasses are surprisingly comfortable in flight even worn on top of my near-vision glasses (surprise!). The augmented reality aspect is tres' cool, and integrates well in the flight environment, just takes a bit of getting used to. But it's not fully baked yet - until they can fix the tendency of the glasses to drift, they won't be able to implement the features that really matter (flight plan/moving map and airspaces).

===CROSSPOST STARTS HERE==>
Here are my reactions from the first couple of experiences with the glasses.

This involves two flights I took in the past week - the first was a 70nm or so flight, the second a local one. I did not realize there were some docs available on setup before taking the first flight, but had gotten the link to them before the second. I played around with the glasses at home first, just to familiarize myself with the interface.

On the first flight, I waited until I was S&L before trying them on. It ended up being a mistake - I was certainly finding it difficult to get everything going in the air, even though the plane was in S&L. The cursor on the virtual screen was too faint for me to see, and coupled with a low response time, navigating the menus became a frustrating experiment in trial and error.

So tip number 1 - set these things up on the ground for your flight.

I eventually did get it going and it was neat to see the overlay, but by that time I got to the final phase of the flight so I had to take them off as they were too distracting.

My passenger enjoyed looking around with them on for a couple of minutes, but it was more of a "whoa" about augmented reality than anything else, since they were not pilots.

Flight 2 was much better. First of all, I had read the docs :) I set everything on the ground, using mixed iLevil mode. One thing that caught me by surprise is that I did not see the taxi/ground stuff - I guess it's not in the software yet?

I did remove the ILS overlay which cleared up a lot of clutter for me. It was neat to see the various airports around by turning my head, but I wasn't sure how far each was. I wish there was some visual indication of the distance to each (maybe show the closer ones in ever-larger font on the scrollbar? size and color would be even better)

I found myself recaging a lot this time, too. About every minute. Not a big deal because it was a simple double tap on the left button, but still a bit irritating. That really needs to be fixed.

Beyond that, I really need the flight plan and airspaces (like in the concept art video) to be included before this becomes really useful for me.
 
Last edited:
Thanks, one question, what is S&L? Never mind, Straight and Level, Doh.
 
evapilotaz said:
What is the price tag for these glasses? How could I ever use them with prescription glasses I use for flying?
Click to expand...

$2000 for the beta tester kit - which includes the iLevil ($1200 MSRP) AND the Epson Moverio BT200 ($700 MSRP), as well as a lifetime subscription to their software (essentially for free, if you consider that everything ships to you free).

I use them with prescription glasses. They sit comfortably on top of them, at least for me. They also come with an insert which allows you to fit prescription lenses into the Moverio. I currently have the insert at the lab to get that done.
 
Do you really get visual depictions of controlled airspace and your intended flightpaths like it shows in the advertisement video on their website?
 
RalphInCA said:
Do you really get visual depictions of controlled airspace and your intended flightpaths like it shows in the advertisement video on their website?
Click to expand...

No, not yet. My understanding is that it's not that they can't render it; the problem is related to the gyro drift, which can make this very unreliable. Once that is solved, it should be there.
 
Onwards, beyond flying, are there any other applications coming to market for this setup that you have heard of?

It would be easier to rationalize the $700 for the Epson Moverio BT200 if there were additional uses or apps.
 
AggieMike88 said:
Onwards, beyond flying, are there any other applications coming to market for this setup that you have heard of?

It would be easier to rationalize the $700 for the Epson Moverio BT200 if there were additional uses or apps.
Click to expand...

Stuff is coming out for certain. Anything that works on Google Glass should work on the Moverio as well, as they are both Android devices. There is a small but growing market for Moverio specific apps (since it can do so much more than Google Glass).
 
It would be really cool if somebody invented a way to detect and display wake turbulence, and integrate it with this.

Is it even physically possible to detect wake turbulence?
 
AggieMike88 said:
It would be easier to rationalize the $700 for the Epson Moverio BT200 if there were additional uses or apps.
Click to expand...

The display on the glasses is pretty darn good. Dunno if it is worth $700, but it is good. I'm thinking that by third or fourth generation, it'll start replacing monitors. Yup, that good.

Right now the touch pad is bad (movement fine, detecting "clicks" sucks), the glasses are too heavy, and the battery life is too short.
 
Clark1961 said:
The display on the glasses is pretty darn good. Dunno if it is worth $700, but it is good. I'm thinking that by third or fourth generation, it'll start replacing monitors. Yup, that good.

Right now the touch pad is bad (movement fine, detecting "clicks" sucks), the glasses are too heavy, and the battery life is too short.
Click to expand...

On this point, is it possible to run with them plugged in to a USB port?
 
This is awesome -- thanks for the update.

My dream of an empty panel, complete with cupholders, is getting closer every day. Ultimately, all of the electronic gizmos we install in our panels (at ENORMOUS expense) will be rendered virtually, right in front of our eyes.

Don't like the AH over there? Slide it a bit to the left, and up a little. There...that's perfect!

I don't know if I will live to see it, but think of the possibilities! :)
 
Jay Honeck said:
This is awesome -- thanks for the update.

My dream of an empty panel, complete with cupholders, is getting closer every day. Ultimately, all of the electronic gizmos we install in our panels (at ENORMOUS expense) will be rendered virtually, right in front of our eyes.

Don't like the AH over there? Slide it a bit to the left, and up a little. There...that's perfect!

I don't know if I will live to see it, but think of the possibilities! :)
Click to expand...

You mean like the glasses flying off your head and under the rudder pedals is turbulence while in IMC?;)
 
Henning said:
You mean like the glasses flying off your head and under the rudder pedals is turbulence while in IMC?;)
Click to expand...

Jay remains VFR-only, by choice, iirc.
 
Even without the gyro drift (which isn't going to get fixed without some other input -- it's fundamental), that type of "augmented reality" is quite likely to be disorienting. And it's a 3D drift, so you need three constraints. If they assume you're always level to handle two of them, you're going to need a lot of sic sacks when you bank or climb. We do that with a star tracker using at least two stars, which isn't going to be feasible on a handheld device.

People who have never worked with stereo displays seem to miss this routinely. It's quite easy to make the user fatigue quickly and even induce motion sickness. It's actually rather difficult to avoid even on a stationary platform.

These guys have their work cut out for them.
 
There are many, many obstacles to making this technology work -- but it is the future of...everything.

Driving cars, motorcycles, boats, planes, stereo equipment, television, PowerPoint presentations, computers, hell, just walking around town -- all of it will benefit from some sort of augmented reality.

I look forward to the day when I can update my panel without spending beaucoup bucks (and ten hard days) to do it!
 
I haven't tried mine in flight yet. In fact, I'm still having trouble getting them to fit correctly such that the screens actually appear in the center of my field of vision.

Only the nose pieces are adjustable on these things. Trouble is, raising the front of the glasses (lenses) up and down doesn't move the screen much in your FOV. And pretty easily the screen can get too high and just disappears.

But if you change the angle of the glasses then the screen can be moved a lot with small changes in viewing angle. But to do this you have to lower the ear pieces by not putting them over your ears. I get the screens dead center by putting the ear pieces halfway to my earlobes. Stupid. I wish they were adjustable.

Maybe my ears are too high, beats me. But I find the glasses utterly useless as an AR HUD when worn normally. With Aero Glass I have to tilt my head back to even see the horizon. :no: They may be great for watching 3D movies, but that defeats the stated AR purpose.

I may have to do some "modifications" to the ear pieces. So far I seem to be the only one talking about this problem, but I think it is a design flaw in the glasses. The ear pieces should be adjustable or replaceable but they are just dumb hunks of plastic.

ETA: Epson says the earpieces cannot be removed. They did give me the email addy for the Project Manager Eric Mizufuka though. So I will fiddle some more before giving him a shout.
 
Last edited:
we have got in on the beta test and they are neat. We were at 7000 and a solid cloud deck from 5 down to 2. My co pilot was wearing them while i did the approach and said the boxs were spot on.

The drift is the only thing holding up foward progress that i can see. it is going to need some type of a fixed point such as an ilevel box velcoed on the dash to make these truely work.

it was good to look out and see the ground and the airports below on top of the clouds.
 
MAKG1 said:
Even without the gyro drift (which isn't going to get fixed without some other input -- it's fundamental), that type of "augmented reality" is quite likely to be disorienting. And it's a 3D drift, so you need three constraints. If they assume you're always level to handle two of them, you're going to need a lot of sic sacks when you bank or climb. We do that with a star tracker using at least two stars, which isn't going to be feasible on a handheld device.

People who have never worked with stereo displays seem to miss this routinely. It's quite easy to make the user fatigue quickly and even induce motion sickness. It's actually rather difficult to avoid even on a stationary platform.

These guys have their work cut out for them.
Click to expand...

Heck, I can't even watch a 3D movie without it making my eyes hurt.
 
csikes91 said:
we have got in on the beta test and they are neat. We were at 7000 and a solid cloud deck from 5 down to 2. My co pilot was wearing them while i did the approach and said the boxs were spot on.

The drift is the only thing holding up foward progress that i can see. it is going to need some type of a fixed point such as an ilevel box velcoed on the dash to make these truely work.

it was good to look out and see the ground and the airports below on top of the clouds.
Click to expand...

Wait, are you saying there is no AHRS in the system as it is? Who thought that was a good idea?:dunno:
 
MAKG1 said:
Even without the gyro drift (which isn't going to get fixed without some other input -- it's fundamental), that type of "augmented reality" is quite likely to be disorienting. And it's a 3D drift, so you need three constraints. If they assume you're always level to handle two of them, you're going to need a lot of sic sacks when you bank or climb. We do that with a star tracker using at least two stars, which isn't going to be feasible on a handheld device.

People who have never worked with stereo displays seem to miss this routinely. It's quite easy to make the user fatigue quickly and even induce motion sickness. It's actually rather difficult to avoid even on a stationary platform.

These guys have their work cut out for them.
Click to expand...

That may be true with VR stereo displays but I don't think it is true with the AR glasses. You can see right through them to the real horizon and the overlaid data is actually pretty unobtrusive and easily ignored. There could be a slight chance of induced vertigo in IMC, perhaps, but not in VMC IMHO.
 
petrolero said:
That may be true with VR stereo displays but I don't think it is true with the AR glasses. You can see right through them to the real horizon and the overlaid data is actually pretty unobtrusive and easily ignored. There could be a slight chance of induced vertigo in IMC, perhaps, but not in VMC IMHO.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I have not experienced any disorientation, and I've now flown with this a cumulative hour or so, plus a couple hours on the ground. The only time when I had an issue was when I tried referring to my iPad in flight - the displays sort of "clashed" for me in an uncomfortable way. This did not happen with the 430 screen, btw.

They are also comfortable for me to wear, even on top of my near-visions. I don't use the ear attachments, they just seem to fit.
 
Henning said:
Wait, are you saying there is no AHRS in the system as it is? Who thought that was a good idea?:dunno:
Click to expand...

There is an AHRS (in the sense of accelerometers and digi compass, etc like an iPhone) in the glasses but that only gives you the attitude of your head, not the aircraft. For a head-mounted HUD to work right you need both head and aircraft attitudes... hence the need for the iLevil.

The iLevil also provides ADS-B traffic so the glasses can theoretically display it in its place, making recognition faster. Traffic recognition to me is the most important potential benefit of a head-mounted HUD. Ground stuff would be important too for preventing rwy incursions but hasn't been enabled yet.
 
petrolero said:
There is an AHRS (in the sense of accelerometers and digi compass, etc like an iPhone) in the glasses but that only gives you the attitude of your head, not the aircraft. For a head-mounted HUD to work right you need both head and aircraft attitudes... hence the need for the iLevil.

The iLevil also provides ADS-B traffic so the glasses can theoretically display it in its place, making recognition faster. Traffic recognition to me is the most important potential benefit of a head-mounted HUD. Ground stuff would be important too for preventing rwy incursions but hasn't been enabled yet.
Click to expand...

Right, that's what I mean, an AHRS for the aircraft, without one I can't see it working properly, nor being able to give critical info correctly.
 
Did some more playing with the glasses last night and I still can't get them to sit right when worn like normal people wear glasses. Will have to contact the project manager I guess.
 
The glasses are fine with a headset. No problems with the Zulus in flight yesterday.
 
Clark1961 said:
The glasses are fine with a headset. No problems with the Zulus in flight yesterday.
Click to expand...

I concur.

It was one of my biggest worries, but for me anyway, I have no issues with both the headset (also Zulus) AND prescription glasses. I also don't find them particularly heavy or nose-pinching, but I may just be lucky in his regard. I don't even have to use the ear attachments.
 
After lots of interest and discussion post OSH14, we haven't heard much about this product....

Anything to share?
 
I signed up and was contacted about a preorder, however they are only offering a 2 year subscription (and not saying how much it will cost after those 2 years) at this time rather than the lifetime that was previously offered to beta testers. So $1-$2k for these just are not looking worth it for me at this time, especially since it sounds like its not quiet ready for primetime and there is no real expectations as to what the reoccurring costs are stated to be
 
A buddy of mine at my airport is a beta tester. They're really cool, but the gyro draft is still a bit of an issue. He recently used the glasses on an IFR flight to Port Arkansas and sure enough the runway was almost exactly in line with what the glasses showed when he broke out of the clouds.
 
Neal Howard said:
A buddy of mine at my airport is a beta tester. They're really cool, but the gyro draft is still a bit of an issue. He recently used the glasses on an IFR flight to Port Arkansas and sure enough the runway was almost exactly in line with what the glasses showed when he broke out of the clouds.
Click to expand...


The gyro drift was the biggest issue (and pretty much a showstopper) when I tried them at OSH. Glance up and down a few times and things were far out of place.

I suspect they'll require better hardware before this goes mainstream, so unless you have money (and time) to burn, I'd hold off for now.

Also, the field of view that was projected on the glasses just filled a rectangle directly in front of you. Forget about the glasses calling attention to anything in your peripheral vision.

Cool tech, and good application but not ready yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top