

Airbus, Boeing Set Sights On Synthetic Vision - aerocapture
http://aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/airbus-boeing-set-sights-synthetic-vision

======
atomicbeanie
I worked for 5 years on synthetic vision. Honestly the avionics industry has
done everything possible to avoid synthetic vision technology. It is humorous
to continue to see news releases like this.

Synthetic vision really is the opposite of the "cockpit automation" mentality
that has dominated civil avionics. That mentality comes from the perspective
that pilot duties are complex, and therefore need to be automated away. The
result is pilots who spend most of their time tending the autopilot.

The unfortunate effect of such automation-centric avionics designs is that
pilots become more removed from reality because they are lost in automation
and less aware of the airplane's situation. A long long list of tragic
accidents support this finding. Synthetic vision embraces a different
perspective.

Synthetic Vision comes from the viewpoint that the pilot will be the best
prepared decision maker when the computer is used to reveal the aircraft's
situation as clearly as possible to the pilot. Fog outside the window? Then
show a picture of the outside anyway (from a database) to avoid terrain.
Airspeed indicator out? Then use the GPS to create an estimate of airspeed,
but put usable speed on the display so the pilot doesn't loose control.
Computers can create meaningful information for pilots when plain instruments
present easily confused data.

Synthetic vision is descendant from extensive military research into how to
make pilots effective in complex and dangerous situations using Head Up
Displays. Tremendous resources went into testing such displays. Aircraft
systems like those on the F-35 continue to force this important finding
forward. Flying is about what's outside the cockpit, not what's in it.

Computers can enhance a pilot's ability to be aware of the aircraft's
situation, and that helps pilots make great decisions. Civil aviation avionics
vendors and the authorities that regulate them are missing out on a big safety
opportunity by dragging their feet here. And those feet are still dragging.

~~~
Dav3xor
I wrote one too -- putting all that clutter under the primary flight
instruments (airspeed/altitude/heading/etc) was always a compromise, and
probably not terribly helpful. Looks super cool though. Sells boxes.

------
FD3SA
Slightly OT:

What is stopping the development of unmanned cargo aircraft?

If SpaceX can deliver cargo autonomously to the space station, I somehow fail
to believe that flying an unmanned 747 from one airstrip to another is
exceedingly complex.

To be clear, I mean that the aircraft is autonomous, not that it is flown by a
remote pilot.

Once these systems are shown to be safer than human flown cargo planes, they
technology will be widespread. After a decade of implementation, it can then
spread to passenger transport as the ultimate auto-pilot. The pilot then just
becomes the flight director, and takes over in case there are any failures.

Sadly, I'm sure the Burj high stack of regulatory documents prevent even
experimentation in this field, let alone commercial implementation.

