It shall be mine!

I'd rather have the data displayed on a HUD on top of my panel than on my glasses. Why would it want all this data constantly in my FOV when I'm doing a daytime sight seeing flight anyway?

I've flown HUD with on NVGs and none of that is so important that I couldn't take a split second to glance down at my panel to see the same symbology. I think sometimes this gee whiz technology is just redundant symbology displayed in a different format.
 
Velocity173 said:
I'd rather have the data displayed on a HUD on top of my panel than on my glasses. Why would it want all this data constantly in my FOV when I'm doing a daytime sight seeing flight anyway?
Click to expand...

You don't. You also don't have to put it on all the time.

Velocity173 said:
I think sometimes this gee whiz technology is just redundant symbology displayed in a different format.
Click to expand...

Bingo.

That is precisely how I see it, too. However, this has a number of advantages to me:

1) it is a lot cheaper to get than installing a full glass cockpit
1a) of course, I can get all the information displayed on my iPad using the iLevil, which is part of the beta $2k buy-in price. The iLevil SW itself is $1200, so my premium - which includes the glasses, too - is $800.
1b) there is a massive difference in my ability to "grasp" what's going on if the information is displayed in front of my nose overlayed on the environment, in an easy to understand fashion, as compared to on the iPad. I may get the same easy access in a modern glass cockpit, but that goes back to cost.

2) it gives me what I need when I need it. This is somewhat redundant with (1b), but somewhat different - if I just want to fly VFR on a pretty day, the Aero Glasses stay in their case. Or maybe I just put them on when I'm getting close to my destination airport which I am unfamiliar with to make it easier to get on the correct glide path, or when I am navigating around a Bravo somewhere, or whatever.

3) it can save my life in an emergency. I may one day fly into IMC as a VFR pilot. I love flying at night, and clouds at night can be hard to spot, for one. While I can do everything to save myself without these, the one thing these glasses will give me in a natural way for my brain to interpret is an artificial horizon in the clouds. No more confusing body signals, no more chances of spinning out of control.

I have more, but these just pop to mind.
 
TCABM said:
JHMCS does a really good job of putting the info you need (and taking info from where you're looking).

The key to this product (if/when it makes production) will be simplicity. For example, with the amount of crap available on PFDs, MFDs, and GPS devices, what needs to be displayed in an accurate, geo-referenced manner is the stuff that will get us killed or save our lives.

For example, traffic on a collision course or nearest airfield, either/both with a pointer when it's out of screen view.

Also, fixating on the HMI (glasses) will scrap the product, too. Think either HUD-like film on all your windows that shows the symbols (and not the glitzy graphics), or projecting on what you already wear, which is one of the reasons JHMCS works so well.
Click to expand...

True. But in a KC-10, we don't get the fancy HUDS ;)
 
Neat concept, but unless the head tracking is really, REALLY good, meaning negligible latency aka: delay between your head moving and the symbology "moving" in the display so that it stays in the same place in space, I fear that trying to overlay the symbology like they show in their video is going to be an express ticket to barfsville.

The Oculus Rift requires an external camera to get the low-latency tracking they trumpet: MEMS gyros aren't quick or precise enough to do that. http://www.oculusvr.com/blog/announcing-the-oculus-rift-development-kit-2-dk2/

Take it one step further, a slightly laggy (ie: poor latency) display tracking, plus AHRS with a slight delay = ripe for PIO/LOC.

I would have liked to have made it to OSH to see it in person, but for now I'm firmly in the stands (not even on the sidelines ;-) ). But I'm still looking forward to hear how it goes for you onwards.

- Josh
 
Really neat new technology but after watching the video I'm afraid it would be too distracting to me. I wonder if there are ways you can actually turn certain parts of it off. I kind of like wearing my Raybans when it's bright out...
 
Taildragger said:
Really neat new technology but after watching the video I'm afraid it would be too distracting to me. I wonder if there are ways you can actually turn certain parts of it off. I kind of like wearing my Raybans when it's bright out...
Click to expand...

Agree. This is the kind of feedback they will hear on day 1 from their beta group. If they haven't already gotten that feedback from OSH I'd be surprised.

My other beef is that it is droid-only. Pilots use ipads.
 
Most of the time I don't feel like playing an F-35 driver when I fly my 60 hp airplane. Besides I hate glasses, because they break the seal of earcups and let the noise in.
 
Inverted said:
Well, when weekend warriors bust TFRs, airspace and altitudes, bringing a product to mass market that can give some situational awareness is great for those that have to share airspace with those who suck at flying.
Click to expand...

Come fly in bethel with me. 49 out of every 50 pilots you are sharing the skies with are some of the best pilots in the country. The 50th flies for the CAP.
 
Jaybird180 said:
A bit sarcastic with this comment, but serious also: I am wondering if any paperwork to the FAA is required as the pilot is operating experimental equipment?

God forbid there is an accident and said pilot is unable to speak for himself as to what he saw or didn't see on the glasses prior to said accident. It may be helpful to have some stats as the positive or negative safety effect of this technology.
Click to expand...

Just like anything else in Part 91, it's likely that the way the FAA looks at this will be that it's OK for you to use it, but when you bust a Bravo, "It wasn't displayed on my uncertified HUD glasses" will not be a valid excuse and you'll get to sit down for a while.

happypilot876 said:
Neat concept, but unless the head tracking is really, REALLY good, meaning negligible latency aka: delay between your head moving and the symbology "moving" in the display so that it stays in the same place in space, I fear that trying to overlay the symbology like they show in their video is going to be an express ticket to barfsville.
Click to expand...

As long as you don't have charts displayed, it's just fine. If the ground is black and you have intersections, airways, traffic, etc. turned on, it's surprisingly quick. When you have charts turned on, it drops to about 1/4 fps or less!

Taildragger said:
Really neat new technology but after watching the video I'm afraid it would be too distracting to me. I wonder if there are ways you can actually turn certain parts of it off.
Click to expand...

Yes, you can select what is displayed.

petrolero said:
My other beef is that it is droid-only. Pilots use ipads.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but Apple hasn't released any glasses yet. Besides, this really doesn't interface with an EFB or anything like that, and the hardware is included, so there's really no difference whether you use an iPad or an Android tablet as the AeroGlass is a self-contained device that happens to run Android.
 
I don't think this should be a debate on whether or not personally you will wear it. Clearly if you fly a cub or a basic VFR aircraft, your use for this technology is exceptionally limited. Whereas, if you fly in complicated airspace or in IMC conditions this may provide a SA edge from an already integrated cockpit. Either way, once they release an actual product, the flood gates can open on this debate. As of now, its far to early to know what this will look like in a few months/years from now.

As stated its purely speculation on whether it will be a great product or not.

Personally, I invested in this beta as a tester, an integrator, and a technologist that looks to participate in a technology that can be useful for pilots in the future. My benefit of this? Well thats simple, the product costs are mostly in equipment which can be resold or upgraded for a relatively moderate hit (ebay). Whereas the software builds and continual development over the years is free to me which will benefit me for (hopefully for the company's sake) many years to come.

I look forward to participating in something that is clearly in the future of flying, and yes I fully appreciate and actually do like taking it back to basics as well (like flying a J-3 on floats ---something I would care not to wear these in). But as far as being a part of something that will grow in the future, thats an exciting thing, no different from being the first guy on the flight line with a VOR, or a GS/LOC unit, or a GPS. Expensive? Yup Obsolescence bound? Surely. But its still exciting none the less.
 
davidm767 said:
I don't think this should be a debate on whether or not personally you will wear it. Clearly if you fly a cub or a basic VFR aircraft, your use for this technology is exceptionally limited. Whereas, if you fly in complicated airspace or in IMC conditions this may provide a SA edge from an already integrated cockpit.
Click to expand...

In addition, jet jocks can fly with Clarity Aloft or similar in-ear headset that integrates well with a glasses-type wearable.

I switched to flying in a helmet in part to avoid glasses, so I need a version that projects onto my visor. Well, and it also needs to be affordable and lightweight. There's no way I'm paying for iLeviL wares and lugging a mandatory iPad.
 
Is it that hard to see airport signs that we need them projected in front of our eyeballs? Are runway markings that hard to see that we need purple boxes to keep us on track on take off? Is an iPad with airspace and ADS-B in that hard to interpret that we need airspace and traffic projected in our FOV? Highway in the sky? Yeah I used HITS on our old Chelton but it's not necessary to be in my face all the time. Will SVT on glasses really keep someone from being spatially disoriented while IMC? It's essentially taking the AI and putting it on glasses.

This device is for people who like gadgets. Just like when I flew HUD in the Army, you had guys who thought it was cool to have all that data when really it was more of a distraction than a benefit. I had students and junior pilots so preoccupied with the information being presented that they were losing their basic visual scanning techniques. Staring at some RADALT in a HUD isn't going to prevent hitting terrain / wires ahead. Also the amount of time it took to focus on the symbology, the brain interpreting it, then refocusing out, took as much time as glancing down to the panel to get that same data.

I'm not anti-technology either. I fly glass on a daily basis at work and while I like the format (SVT, HTAWS, TCAD), I can fly the analog (steam) version just as easy. Know your surroundings before you fly and look out the window.
 
McFly. I understand your concern with distractions for pilots, which is why these shouldn't be used to teach. I will fully accept your rationale on that.

Will some pilots use this as a crutch? You bet. Just as some people buy the Cirrus thinking the Chute will save their bacon in situations that just needed better training, planing, understanding of systems, proficiency, etc.

I personally fly steam every day, I dont have SVT, HTWAS, TCAS, etc. However I have flown with that in the past and appreciate what that provides. Day to Day I fly as well as teach in congested Class B/C/D airspace where all of the airports are surrounded by metropolitan. The closest Class E field is nearly 35nm away, and where there are often visibility restrictions. Would this technology save me from making mistakes, certainly not, but it surely makes things a heck of a lot easier to distinguish. I also grew up flying in the Mountain west, where on low vis VFR days, the terrain was often masked or presented a visual illusion of being passable when not.

The point of this is presenting a pilot with the OPTION of increasing SA, it does not however give the pilot instant SA...thats for the pilot to disseminate the information. A pilot with low comprehension, proficiency, or experience often lacks SA because they don't see the world in its full context. These will not help with that. My goal with these is to help develop a technology that adds to the pilots SA (assuming the pilot already has some level of awarness). Seeing that terrain turn red ahead, the victor airway approaching, that city matching with the chart, or that airport thats under my wing or behind me when I NEED to get down, all adds to the pilot. But task saturation or visual overflow can distract from the pilot.

These are not for everyone. Its not my job to say that this is, nor will I suggest this technology for everyone and most surely not for every situation. I know for a fact I wouldn't put these on for pattern work or when I occasionally fly that cub I mentioned. But I would find myself utilizing these at night, or in low vis VFR, or even in IFR (as a supplement to my certified gauges).
 
I ordered mine today to be a beta tester. Little expensive if you do the whole package. But hey..its only money, right? Yikes!!! Owning a plane and loving technology sure dont come cheap!!
 
Can I send and read text messages from them? I think these things will be reducing SA not increasing it. To be fair getting FB updates in your face while flying is a form of SA, not useful SA but SA. Well imaginary internet persona SA, but still SA. Besides instead of the joy of flying it seems like driving around looking at Christmas lights.
 
Taildragger said:
Really neat new technology but after watching the video I'm afraid it would be too distracting to me. I wonder if there are ways you can actually turn certain parts of it off. I kind of like wearing my Raybans when it's bright out...
Click to expand...


There is. It's on the settings menu at startup though, not easily accessible in flight as far as I could tell.
 
ClimbnSink said:
Can I send and read text messages from them? I think these things will be reducing SA not increasing it. To be fair getting FB updates in your face while flying is a form of SA, not useful SA but SA. Well imaginary internet persona SA, but still SA. Besides instead of the joy of flying it seems like driving around looking at Christmas lights.
Click to expand...

Pretty soon we will be able to simulate flight on a personal computer, imagine being able to land a c172 at Ohare without Worrying about ATC, fuel or busting a regulation...you'll even be able to do it without a medical.
 
bartmc said:
Pretty soon we will be able to simulate flight on a personal computer, imagine being able to land a c172 at Ohare without Worrying about ATC, fuel or busting a regulation...you'll even be able to do it without a medical.
Click to expand...
PC flightsims are probably what is really killing GA.:D
 
ClimbnSink said:
PC flightsims are probably what is really killing GA.:D
Click to expand...

Probably more true than we like to believe. I have a friend who has been interested in aviation for the last 10 years. We always talked planes and about 8 years ago he built a sweet flightsim with 3 screens, while I went and got my actual license and flew actual airplanes. Just saw him a couple of months ago and he is now up to a 9 screen setup. I asked him why not just learn to fly if he is going to spend all of that effort and money on a flightsim? He said he likes just being able to "fly" without any worries and with a glass of red wine in his hand. :dunno:
 
For me, the biggest theoretical benefit of these is quick acquisition of traffic. Everything else is much less important IMHO.

I do think these have the potential to decrease SA just because of the form factor of the glasses. They appear to restrict peripheral vision. And the little screens only cover about a 23 degree arc. Equivalent to a 40" TV at 2.5m Epson says.

But that is all important feedback. They need to know how these things perform in the real world and I think it is likely that these glasses won't be good enough to enable wide acceptance by pilots.

Personally, I probably won't be using these during taxi, takeoff or landing. Well at this point there are no features you'd need during those critical phases anyway.

But if these things can help me ID conflicting traffic sooner than with naked eyes then they will have proved the concept. Form factor will only improve with time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top