Runway Texture and Grid Pattern Effects on Rate-of-Descent Perception
To date, perceptual errors occur in determining descent rate from a computer-generated image in flight simulation. Pilots tend to touch down twice as hard in simulation than in flight, and more training time is needed in simulation before reaching steady-state performance. Barnes suggested that recognition of range may be the culprit, and he cited that problems such as collimated objects, binocular vision, and poor resolution lead to poor estimation of the velocity vector. Brown's study essentially ruled out that the lack of binocular vision is the problem. Dorfel added specificity to the problem by showing that pilots underestimated range in simulated scenes by 50% when 800 ft from the runway threshold. Palmer and Petitt showed that pilots are able to distinguish between a 1.7 ft/sec and 2.9 ft/sec sink rate when passively observing sink rates in a night scene. Platform motion also plays a role, as previous research has shown that the addition of substantial platform motion improves pilot estimates of vertical velocity and results in simulated touchdown rates more closely resembling flight. This experiment examined how some specific variations in the visual scene properties affect a pilot's perception of sink rate. It extended another experiment that focused on the visual and motion cues necessary for helicopter autorotations. In that experiment, pilots performed steep approaches to a runway. The visual content of the runway and its surroundings varied in two ways: texture and rectangular grid spacing. Four textures, included a no-texture case, were evaluated. Three grid spacings, including a no-grid case, were evaluated. The results showed that pilot better controlled their vertical descent rates when good texture cues were present. No significant differences were found for the grid manipulation. Using those visual scenes a simple psychophysics, experiment was performed. The purpose was to determine if the variations in the visual scenes allowed pilots to better perceive vertical velocity. To determine that answer, pilots passively viewed a particular visual scene in which the vehicle was descending at two different rates. Pilots had to select which of the two rates they thought was the fastest rate. The difference between the two rates changed using a staircase method, depending on whether or not the pilot was correct, until a minimum threshold between the two descent rates was reached. This process was repeated for all of the visual scenes to decide whether or not the visual scenes did allow pilots to perceive vertical velocity better among them. All of the data have yet to be analyzed; however, neither the effects of grid nor texture revealed any statistically significant trends. On further examination of the staircase method employed, a possibility exists that the lack of an evident trend may be due to the exit criterion used during the study. As such, the experiment will be repeated with an improved exit criterion in February. Results of this study will be presented in the submitted paper.