Google Glass in the cockpit?

On Sunday, May 26, 2013 2:26:10 PM UTC-5, son_of_flubber wrote:
This is funny, but it gives a good idea of the Google Glass point of view.



http://mashable.com/2013/05/25/googl...-photographer/



Will we all want to be wearing these in the cockpit three years from now?



Not shown is the ability to interact through voice commands and receive information via a synthetic voice. That seems to have potential above the sunlight readable display angle.



Anyone working on an XCSoar port to Google Glass?

Wrong platform. It will be these. http://www.reconinstruments.com/

On Tuesday, May 28, 2013 12:23:38 AM UTC-4, wrote:
Wrong platform. It will be these. http://www.reconinstruments.com/

On Wednesday, May 29, 2013 7:39:24 AM UTC-4, Evan Ludeman wrote:
I think a *far* more important issue is the tendency of humans to focus on the attractive nuisance of a display.


As wrru points out, there are a variety of wearable computers. This one www.reconinstruments.com does not turn the display on until you look at it and the blindspot is lower relative to the horizon on Google Glass.

On Wednesday, May 29, 2013 11:16:21 AM UTC-4, son_of_flubber wrote:
On Tuesday, May 28, 2013 12:23:38 AM UTC-4, wrote:

Wrong platform. It will be these. http://www.reconinstruments.com/



On Wednesday, May 29, 2013 7:39:24 AM UTC-4, Evan Ludeman wrote:

I think a *far* more important issue is the tendency of humans to focus on the attractive nuisance of a display.





As wrru points out, there are a variety of wearable computers. This one www.reconinstruments.com does not turn the display on until you look at it and the blindspot is lower relative to the horizon on Google Glass.

People have made careers out studying this stuff. It's not a question of lack of "adaptability" (thanks Sean, roll eyes). It's the way our perception, attention and task switching work. We are *really* vulnerable to missing the forested mountain looming outside the window for the attractive little display. Texting while crashing, etc.

It's NOT about the blind spot. That's my point. It's about the fact that your perception is otherwise occupied. As well, the perception that you think you can multi-task is an illusion.

Not sure the military HUD is relevant to soaring. Might be fun for the Labor Day flour bombing contest. Most of the information we need for XC soaring is nav-related and better displayed on a map. I don't think I'd want my view of terrain and sky cluttered up with an information overlay anyway.

T8

On Wednesday, May 29, 2013 11:55:42 AM UTC-4, Evan Ludeman wrote:

It's NOT about the blind spot. That's my point. It's about the fact that your perception is otherwise occupied.

I agree that adding a constant stream of "extra information" with a HUD is a very bad idea, but a well-designed HUD interface seems worthy of consideration. For example, having airspeed digits pop up just below the top edge of the glare shield (via HUD), should I get close to stall speed, (because I hit wind shear in the pattern), is something that I would be willing to try. Likewise, a synthetic voice that calmly tells me that my spoilers popped open during takeoff would be worthwhile to consider.

The traditional way of using panel mounted analog instruments is not perfect. Looking down and reading an analog ASI is not a cost-free operation. If HUD allowed us to reduce the size of the traditional instrument panel, say drop the top of the glare shield by six inches, pilots would have a greatly improved field of vision forward.

Likewise down the road, HUD could patch in video images of the blind spots created by the structure of the glider. You could look through your wings to see the glider that is slightly below you in the thermal.

I agree that poorly designed and tested technology (both old and new) makes flying more dangerous for everyone.

Sigh. I find this thread so telling. Inability to change...

On Wednesday, May 29, 2013 11:49:37 AM UTC-6, Sean F (F2) wrote:
Sigh. I find this thread so telling. Inability to change...

Nah, it's just easier to come up with imaginary reasons why something might not work than to make the effort to really understand the technology and find reasons why it might be a good idea.

Distraction is a red herring. Take a look at the "bells and whistles" in the cockpit of any turbine airplane and then a glider. Yes, there is a pilot training difference. But, no one is saying use new gadgets in a glider without training - even if it's just reading the manual.

Combat pilots use Helmet Mounted Displays (HMD's)and no one has said it's a distraction - in fact, try to take it away from them once they've used one..

On Wednesday, May 29, 2013 2:43:11 PM UTC-4, Bill D wrote:

Nah, it's just easier to come up with imaginary reasons why something might not work than to make the effort to really understand the technology and find reasons why it might be a good idea.

I think that is too harsh. I agree that "change sucks" and even though we might revel in the new possibilities, everyone is naturally stressed by the extremely rapid rate of technological and social change.

To paraphrase Douglas Adams, author of "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy":

Every useful technology invented before you turn 20 is absolutely essential to life. Every useful technology invented before you turn 25, will be grudgingly incorporated into your daily life. But one naturally feels that every technology invented after you turn 25, COMES STRAIGHT FROM THE DEVIL!

son_of_flubber wrote, On 5/29/2013 9:43 AM:
Likewise, a synthetic voice that calmly tells me that my spoilers
popped open during takeoff would be worthwhile to consider.

Your vario may already be able to warn you of spoilers open on takeoff.
My Cambridge 302 warns me, though not with a voice.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email me)
- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Feb/2010" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm
http://tinyurl.com/yb3xywl

Guys and Gals,

At the end of the day it really does not matter that much. Having XC soar crash a couple days in a contest recently, I flew the task with a stopwatch, a map and a iPhone 5 running iGlide of the internal GPS. I did fine in the task.

That said, as glider pilots are often in close proximity to numerous close proximity traffic and have trouble reading digital displays due to vision issues or screen brightness issues, having a glasses HUD like display makes sense in several obvious ways. Adopting this new tech certainly won't be necessary, KS still flies an SN10 with no moving map for example. But it certainly has the potential to be a better way to display key data in exactly the same way military & commercial pilots, soldiers, etc are doing so today.

The only difference is that very soon HUD or smart glasses "hardware" cost is going to come way down, performance and application range is going to go way up. Development is going to explode. Common folk will be able to afford them. In 10 years, perhaps 5 (mark my words), the smart phone will be a relic. Watches, glasses and voice activated micro devices (earpieces) will become the way we communicate and access information. The smart phone will be as outdated as the "workstation or desktop" was last decade.

Some visionary glider pilots may not even have (wait for it...) any steam gauges in their gliders at all...it would cost far less to have a digital box output flight data to glasses and have a small backup screen on the panel..

As always, I embrace the new tech and enjoy learning (imagining) what it can offer. I do not fear change or learning new ways to do things. In fact, I love witnessing change and watching the naysayers squirm. I love shaking up the status quo. Trying to find ways to attack new tech before it has even arrived is humorous frankly. As with all of the past "discussions" here on related topics, by the time you learn of it, it's already here. Banning it is impossible, unnecessary and in most cases completely unenforceable.. Yet, I do fear the RC is probably already in discussions about drafting a new ban on HUD glasses. :-).

Here is to Google glass and the other competitors that are today working feverishly to catch the latest wave... And here is to the pilots that embrace it without fear of change.

Sean
F2

On Thursday, May 30, 2013 10:12:06 AM UTC-4, Sean F (F2) wrote:
Guys and Gals,



At the end of the day it really does not matter that much. Having XC soar crash a couple days in a contest recently, I flew the task with a stopwatch, a map and a iPhone 5 running iGlide of the internal GPS. I did fine in the task.



That said, as glider pilots are often in close proximity to numerous close proximity traffic and have trouble reading digital displays due to vision issues or screen brightness issues, having a glasses HUD like display makes sense in several obvious ways. Adopting this new tech certainly won't be necessary, KS still flies an SN10 with no moving map for example. But it certainly has the potential to be a better way to display key data in exactly the same way military & commercial pilots, soldiers, etc are doing so today.



The only difference is that very soon HUD or smart glasses "hardware" cost is going to come way down, performance and application range is going to go way up. Development is going to explode. Common folk will be able to afford them. In 10 years, perhaps 5 (mark my words), the smart phone will be a relic. Watches, glasses and voice activated micro devices (earpieces) will become the way we communicate and access information. The smart phone will be as outdated as the "workstation or desktop" was last decade.



Some visionary glider pilots may not even have (wait for it...) any steam gauges in their gliders at all...it would cost far less to have a digital box output flight data to glasses and have a small backup screen on the panel.



As always, I embrace the new tech and enjoy learning (imagining) what it can offer. I do not fear change or learning new ways to do things. In fact, I love witnessing change and watching the naysayers squirm. I love shaking up the status quo. Trying to find ways to attack new tech before it has even arrived is humorous frankly. As with all of the past "discussions" here on related topics, by the time you learn of it, it's already here. Banning it is impossible, unnecessary and in most cases completely unenforceable. Yet, I do fear the RC is probably already in discussions about drafting a new ban on HUD glasses. :-).



Here is to Google glass and the other competitors that are today working feverishly to catch the latest wave... And here is to the pilots that embrace it without fear of change.



Sean

F2

You are simply looking for windmills to tilt at.

Presenting yourself as some sort of visionary in a throng of fearful, vengeful luddites is, shall we say, a little clownish.

T8