> Yes to all of that. But, in a demanding instrument approach, meaning
> one where the weather is barely above minimums, a HUD can improve your
> ability to fly the approach and also look for the field environment
> undisturbed.
To me, that is the best application of HUD. Approaches at minimums is
tough stuff and a single-pilot cockpit is busy and nerve-wracking.
Glancing up and down can be problematic and disorientating. A
two-person cockpit can be good if the pilot flying the approach is
able to keep his eyes on the instrument panel until the other pilot
says that the runway is in sight.
The worst part of HUDs and other digital displays is the same
situation that I've groused about with digital displays in cameras.
You have to READ the displays. The OM-2S is likely the best example of
a digital display I've ever seen in a camera (photography and OM
content) as it mimics an analog display. You can see what the exposure
is going to be without even looking at it.
I don't know if either of our ex-mil pilots experienced this, but many
airplanes will have certain gauges (steam style gauges) rotated in
their mounts so the "normal" operating position of the needle is
straight up. While the gauge is cockeyed and somewhat difficult to
read when in other power settings, at least when in normal flight
mode, you can tell when something isn't right without even looking at
the gauges. Just a glance across the array of gauges will reveal
something off. Nothing to read and "understand", just a visual knowing
what is and isn't right.
--
Ken Norton
ken@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.zone-10.com
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|