New FAA approved HUD display for GA

NordicDave

NordicDave

En-Route
Joined
Oct 31, 2015
Messages
2,737
Location
Monterey County
Display Name
NordicDave
Home Airfield
KWVI
WOW, and it only costs $29,500 usd. o_O

https://www.avweb.com/air-shows-events/aea/skydisplay-hud-earns-stc-approval/
MyGoFlight-SkyDisplay-HUD-scaled.jpg
 
Too obtrusive. I don’t even like having my compass in my FoV let alone this thing hanging in the way.

They make a bigger deal about looking inside than what it really is. I’m not tilting my head up and down while flying VFR. Instrument panels aren’t mounted on the floor. My PFD is 6 inches below the top of the panel. Takes all of a second to glance down to see what I need. You’re VFR. Instrumentation isn’t that critical anyway. Look outside and enjoy the view.
 
Civil HUDs are catching up with glass in the trend to cram as much information as possible into the display, whether you need it or not. Throw a Kindle reader up there while you're at it. In the meantime I'm looking for the declutter switch and a better transparency for a combiner.

Nauga,
who appreciates human factors, despite appearances
 
This seems like a terrible idea. If you’re in IMC you should be doing your full instrument scan, which appears harder with this thing. If you’re in VMC you should be looking outside, not staring at the HUD. At some point more electronics stops making flying safer, and just increases stress and distraction.
 
AlleyCat67 said:
This seems like a terrible idea. If you’re in IMC you should be doing your full instrument scan, which appears harder with this thing. If you’re in VMC you should be looking outside, not staring at the HUD.
Click to expand...
No argument with the difficulty of an instrument scan with that...thing...but it's different with a good one, especially for approaches. They don't replace a normal complement of conventional instruments for IMC anyway. WRT VMC, the idea of a HUD in VMC is that you *are* looking outside and don't have to break that to make a brief scan. Nobody who knows what they're doing is *staring* at it at the expense of a VMC scan outside...but that doesn't rule out the GA contingent, I suppose. :rolleyes:

Nauga,
and his fish finder
 
Last edited:
Can anyone actually see what's on that thing?
 
Why not add the Dow index ticker streaming across the bottom, too? HUDs with proper training, etc., have their uses, but I'll pass on this one, myself.
I get that I'm a Neanderthal old guy, but just because we have the technology doesn't always mean it's desirable to use it. I just don't need to have my phone talk to my refrigerator when I'm away from the house.
 
One of the features of the HUD in the C-17 is that it can be folded down out of the way. Procedure is for the pilot not flying to fold the HUD down to have a clear view out the front when they break out of the clouds on final.

Never understood the need since there’s a de-clutter setting but AMC is really old school.

Cheers
 
Tech innovation is welcome. Expensive devices become affordable gadgets one day. How much did aviation weather in the cockpit cost 20 years ago? Now we all have it.

But gotta ask: why would you need an artificial horizon during VMC, when by definition you have a real horizon visible in the windscreen? I suppose it would make the transition to instruments faster if you were flying along VFR and inadvertantly entered IMC.

It needs separate view configurations for VFR and IFR. For VFR, useful info would be airspeed, altitude, AoA, heading bug with course line, and traffic pointer. Big numbers for airspeed and alt, not a tape.

IFR not my department, but not sure why you would want your head up when the windscreen is solid white. Maybe data to help you make go-around decisions on approaches?
 
Ed Haywood said:
Tech innovation is welcome. Expensive devices become affordable gadgets one day. How much did aviation weather in the cockpit cost 20 years ago? Now we all have it.

But gotta ask: why would you need an artificial horizon during VMC, when by definition you have a real horizon visible in the windscreen? I suppose it would make the transition to instruments faster if you were flying along VFR and inadvertantly entered IMC.

It needs separate view configurations for VFR and IFR. For VFR, useful info would be airspeed, altitude, AoA, heading bug with course line, and traffic pointer. Big numbers for airspeed and alt, not a tape.

IFR not my department, but not sure why you would want your head up when the windscreen is solid white. Maybe data to help you make go-around decisions on approaches?
Click to expand...

That’s the same question I used to ask when flying HUD with NVGs. I’m flying VFR and can see the horizon. I don’t need to see symbology blocking (refocus) critical things like trees, wires, other aircraft in formation, etc. Never thought it was very useful. Could tell my ground speed and altitude within a whisker without even looking at instrumentation.
1E3CF04A-B00A-46B0-8A87-E6FA403E168C.jpeg
Now, flying GA without NVGs on a dark night, a HUD has a slight benefit. Not enough to spend $30K though.
 
Velocity173 said:
That’s the same question I used to ask when flying HUD with NVGs. I’m flying VFR and can see the horizon. I don’t need to see symbology blocking (refocus) critical things like trees, wires, other aircraft in formation, etc. Never thought it was very useful. Could tell my ground speed and altitude within a whisker without even looking at instrumentation.
Click to expand...

Cool display. Is that integrated into your googles? What does the symbology do when you lean your head?

I've ridden along in the jumpseat wearing NVG's on a couple of hairy night flights. One that sticks in my memory was a low level aerial refuel in an MH-53 off an HC-130. Another was an MH-47E in white out conditions at about 12K in Colorado. Both times I had to take my NODs off and go sit down in the back. It was better not knowing.
 
AlleyCat67 said:
This seems like a terrible idea. If you’re in IMC you should be doing your full instrument scan, which appears harder with this thing. If you’re in VMC you should be looking outside, not staring at the HUD. At some point more electronics stops making flying safer, and just increases stress and distraction.
Click to expand...
I must be missing something. What about this makes a full scan harder? Assuming this is certified for primary use (Unclear from what I've seen)
 
Ed Haywood said:
Cool display. Is that integrated into your googles? What does the symbology do when you lean your head?

I've ridden along in the jumpseat wearing NVG's on a couple of hairy night flights. One that sticks in my memory was a low level aerial refuel in an MH-53 off an HC-130. Another was an MH-47E in white out conditions at about 12K in Colorado. Both times I had to take my NODs off and go sit down in the back. It was better not knowing.
Click to expand...

The HUD is a small monocle that attaches to the end of the NVGs. Gives not just six pack and NAV info but engine instrumentation as well. The cord to the HUD plugs into a programming box that can tailor the needs of the user. I never really cared for it. I used to turn the thing off or just make up a story that my HUD was inop.

Don’t know about the 53 guys but the 47 flight you were on, they were most likely using HUD. Funny story about HUD and 47s. One dark *** night in Astan I was following a 47 and my WO1 (FNG) copilot was using the HUD. I actually had mine on in this case because I was training him. Anyway, we departed as chalk 2 right behind them. My copilot was doing his best at trying to keep up but unfortunately the 60 doesn’t have near the high altitude capability as the 47 and he was complicating things by flying in their rotor wash. He’s totally concentrated at maintaining position off the 47 but not looking at any instrumentation. I alerted him “approaching max torque.” Still didn’t listen and kept pulling collective. “You’re at max torque.” Still didn’t acknowledge and pulled more collective. Next thing you hear is low rotor as he’s pulling like 107 %. He’s like “wholly ****, what happened!” I laughed “you’ve got the stupid torque in your HUD. Are you using the thing or what!?” :D

Just goes to show you how the brain works when it comes to information overload and prioritization of tasks. For my copilot that night, all he was capable at the time was maintaining position off of two green glowing exhausts. Everything else went by the wayside.

https://www.militaryaerospace.com/c...ors-for-army-helicopter-nightvision-equipment
 
Last edited:
Velocity173 said:
Don’t know about the 53 guys but the 47 flight you were on, they were most likely using HUD.
Click to expand...

Could be, dunno. I'm an old fart so all my war stories are old too. The 47 ride would have been in 1996. We were exfiling a 10th Group ODA from a winter exercise. They were on a PZ at about 11,000 feet, in a small clearing surrounded by tall evergreens loaded with heavy snow. When we descended below the treetops, instant whiteout. At night. On goggles. They just kept descending in the blind til we landed. I'm always impressed by TF160 crews but that one stuck with me.
 
Ed Haywood said:
Could be, dunno. I'm an old fart so all my war stories are old too. The 47 ride would have been in 1996. We were exfiling a 10th Group ODA from a winter exercise. They were on a PZ at about 11,000 feet, in a small clearing surrounded by tall evergreens loaded with heavy snow. When we descended below the treetops, instant whiteout. At night. On goggles. They just kept descending in the blind til we landed. I'm always impressed by TF160 crews but that one stuck with me.
Click to expand...

OK, I think HUD came out in like 98 or 99 so they probably didn’t have it then. Had the crappy 15 mil NVGs with 20/40 acuity back then as well.

Yeah the 160th guys are pretty comfortable with brownout / whiteout ops. I believe their prerequisites are a bare min of 500 NVG hrs before applying. Waiverable of course. As they say, “we own the night.”
 
It will be interesting to see if this concept will work for GA. The full size, extremely modern HUD I use is still somewhat of a preference item for many crews; my favorite application is EVS. Curious to see if this (very small?) HUD can truly expand capability, or if it's a novelty for us in GA, at least right now. It features a flight director, so it would appear to be a serious offering.
 
I’m not sure. I’ve never used a HUD, but that thing looks too busy.
 
From the picture in the original post, it looks like the image isn't focused at infinity - the HUD image looks sharp, while the outside image is out of focus. One of the things that makes the HUD in large aircraft so valuable is that your eyes don't need to refocus when looking at the HUD symbology vs. looking through the HUD to see the outside world behind it. Has anyone here seen this new product in real life and can confirm the focus?
 
hud2.jpg

I took this in cruise some number of years ago. A photo will never be great at capturing what the HUD actually "feels" like in use. Every detail on that combiner is easy to read in any lighting condition. It's always at the perfect focus. That's because the image is at, or close to optical infinity and physically moving the user closer to or further away from the combiner doesn't make any difference.

I'm guessing this HUD II is several times larger than the SkyDisplay. It doesn't "feel" overly large to me, but it certainly isn't too small and it's positioned on the flight deck in such a way that it's easy to move my scan around as needed (usually for configuration tasks) and back onto the HUD. It's hard to tell from the press release imagery of the SkyDisplay but the combiner and projection hardware appears to be contained in one physical unit, which is a logical design for an airplane like the Cirrus SR-22, but appears to obscure a lot of the pilot's forward vision whether the HUD is stowed or not:

hud-skydisplay.jpg

It looks as though it may be possible to swing the entire assembly aft on that hinge mechanism, but maybe not -- seems like most pilots would be hitting their head on that.

I leave the HUD stowed on the ground and in cruise. Or, I shift the combiner into a detent which turns the imagery off and allows me to look through the glass with no HUD symbology projected onto the combiner. Makes it easier to taxi around. I would dislike having the SkyDisplay in my field of view while taxiing.

In my experience the HUD is generally used tactically rather than all the time. I tend to use it on takeoff and approach only, and not always for that matter. There are times it makes more sense to use it than not. Some crews use the HUD constantly. Most of us rarely use it in cruise except to use the horizon line to see if we'll top a CB.

This unit seems to be getting a lot closer to a useable GA HUD, but it remains to be seen if it's a net positive yet, in terms of what you get vs. the compromises you need to make in a small GA cockpit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top