UNCLASSIFIED

AD NUMBER

AD410322

NEW LIMITATION CHANGE

TOApproved for public release, distributionunlimited

FROMDistribution authorized to U.S. Gov't.agencies and their contractors; ForeignGovernment Information; JUL 1962. Otherrequests shall be referred to AdvisoryGroup for Aerospace NATO Research &Technology Org BP25, Rue Ancelle, F-92201Neuilly-Sur-Seine Cedex, France.

AUTHORITY

AGARD ltr, 2 Jul 1970

THIS PAGE IS UNCLASSIFIED

UNCLASSIFIED

AD 410322

DEFENSE DOCUMENTATION CENTERFOR

SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION

CAMERON STATION. ALEXANDRIA. VIRGINIA

UNCLASSIFIED

IJPICZ: %.en overnent or other dravin, rpei-ficatioza or other data are uped for any p eother than in connection with a definitely relatedgoverzment p•ocurmant opoatical, the U. S.Oovernment thereby incurs no Aespnsuibility, nor anyobligation vhatsoeerj end the fact that a Qowemi-aent my have fozmlated, ftzdbed, or In ma mysupplied the said dravings, sgpeiflo•tians, or otherdata Is not to be reg*Ae by Impliation or other-vis as In any amer licemnlsn the holder or earother proon or corporation, or comnvyin amy rightsor pernission to mnnufacture, use or sell anypatented invention that may in any wvy be relatedthereto.

REPORT 404

LO U)VISORY GROUP FOR AERONAUTICAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENTo 64 RUE DE VARENNE, PARIS VII

REPORT 404

CJ-

VERTICAL INSTRUMENTS

CQ byJ. H. KEARNS and E. WARREN

JULY 1962

N0

NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION

REPORT 404

NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION

ADVISORY GROUP FOR AERONAUTICAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

VERTICAL INSTRUMENTS

by

J.H. Kearns and .Warren

This Report v'a, Ir,,nted a: the Tventy-?lrst Meeting of the Flight Mechanics Panelof AGAWD. held in Paris. 6-10 July. 1962

7-

SUNNARY

This Report is a discussion of Vertical Scale Instruments covering

the historical facts whi(h lead to their desir. through to their appli-

cation. The point is made that Vertical Instruments represent the

foundation of a new approach to the creation, design and developm!ent ofdisplays. This was our first attempt to deliberately design displays

su that they would be suited to the total system job and the needs of

the pilot. These instruments are now in use in over twelve squadrons

and both pilot acceptance and reliability have been very good. Work is

continuing on several parts of the Air Force Control-Display Program of

which the effort on vertical instruments is a part. wIk is being done

on improved mechanization techniques, more comprehensive analysis methods

for determining information requirements for human operators performing

complex control tasks and advanced display designs to meet these require-

ments.

SOOMA! 3i

Ce rapport traite des appareils de manure & 6cholle verticale, avec

un expnei des faits historiques ayant monai A leur conception et I leur

application. Apr~s avoir rappeli qua lea wparoils i ihcblle verticale

representent la base d'une nouvelle maninre d'aoorder Ia question do la

criation. do l'itudo et do la r~aliamtion d'indicateura. l'autour aignaleto fait quo c'est Is premire foots quo 1't-% s*ast offorci d'4tudier des

indirateurs eoressaoent pour qu' ila conviennont au fonctionnoment du

systime dana son enteor ot aux besoins du pilots. Cas Instruments wont

maanteiant ,n service aupris de plus do 12 escadrillas. et ont donn" des

rosultats tris satisfatsants aussi bian du point do vue do leur accepts-

tion par lea pilotas qua du poir.t do vue do leur sunrti da fonction-

notent. Dos travaux as poursuivont mu titre du Programm d'indicateurs

do I'AnSeo do V'Air Moricalno. at dont ceux sur les Instr-mants It

ichelle vertical# font partle. Dos itudes on couraportent sur destechniques de mecanimation amlior~ea. sur des mithodes do dipouillointl

plus comprihensives porsottet do difinir lt Indications nicossairos

i 1 opirsteur humain dans I oexecution do aanoeuvres do comande coiplexes.

et our dos modbloe d' Indicatours d' avant-garde destines i ropmondre l

cos bosoins.

6.u9. 13.ON

• [] I

CONTENTS

Page

SUPIARVIt

SOIIAIREIi

LIST OF FIGURES

I. INTRODUCTION

2. UACkGROUNo

3. TESTS

34. T•E FUTMRE

S JIL lOGRAPin

FIGURLS 114

b iSTI IO as l

LIST OF FIGURiS

Page

Pig. 1 Air Force advanced instrument system 14

Flg. 2 Air Force advanced instruments 15

Pig. 3 Advanced instrument installations 16

Pig. 4 Mechanim coparisos - old & -e. 17

Fig.5 Saples of vertical scale designs 18

FIg. 5(a) 'Phase III' altimeter 19

Fig. 6 Teat panels 20

Pig.7 'Phase II' airspeed 21

Pig. 8 A fuel mnagsmnt indicator 22

pig. 9 Vertical sKale with variable scale factor 23

Pig. 10 A flight control system 24

Pig. 11 The Mark IV spaco ship cockpit (experimental) 25

iv

VE~RTICAL INSTRIUMENTS

J.U. Keari~s* and E. Warren*

1. INTRODUCTION

A review of vertical instruments is a very appropriate subject for many reasons.First of all, a prior paper by Major Brown, in May 1959, announced and introduced thenew instruments to this committee and it is therefore proper to report on our experiencewith these Instruments. But perhaps a more significant reason for discussing verticalinstruments and. in particular, the Air Florce Advanced Instrument System is that they werea party to. in fact an essential part of. what we might call the new age or the scient-ificage of display dosign. instruments and displays are certainly not a new subject hut, atabout the saue time thet the Air Force introduced their new vertical Instruments,displays began to be recognized as an engineering problem in their own right. Thevertical instruments represent the foundation of this new approach to the creation.design ar.d development of displays. This was our first attempt to deliberately designdisplays so that they would be suited to the total system job and to the needs of thepilot. Furthermore, this was the first attempt to design a set or group of instrumentato fit together in-so-far as the display is concerned. The Air Force Advanced InstrumentSystem consists of four instruments which present the essential Information Parametersas attitude and heading - naviational relations - on one part, augmented by analtitude group and a speed group which are both vertical tape instruments. Since thetwo tape instruments look aPpreciably different the System has become known as theAir Fbrce Vertical Instrument Program. That is unfortunate because the verttcalcharacteristics are only of minor significance Land ocnur in only two instruments.

Four displays. in-lopendent yet designed to harmonixe and to work in a cooperativemianner, marked the beginning of the development and Application of systems designProcedures to the Instrumaint display area. Systems design an~I systems engineeringare not new and were not new at that time. but systems design of the Instrument displaysper' se was new and so It Is Appropriate to look beeL upon these instrvisents, to reviewthe progress, and to -onaider the present status not only for the purpose of looa logback and evaluating the instritments but also as a mans of reviewing progress In thedevelopment of control-display as a science. Titus I would Ilke to report our ewperioeaswith vertical instruments and our plans for them, and correlate thes* with the progressmade in our Infant acitrmee, Ctintrol-Oispley.

2. BACKGROUND

it is a little difficult to Pinpoint the @tact moment cif conception of this newapproech to dirplsay design. but esrttin'y there was a long gestatioo period for theessentials of the Idea t0 take form. The preli"Inary design of the Air Porte InstrumeotSystem eas done by Siegfried Knoemyer. Mr. Laiemever Is the originator tof the modernflight director. which presents flight Informtation Jilvided into two displays. theattitude director and the horizontal situation disPla0. Variatioas of this basic

11'aaph (:on frol t.abrorctory. Acrrcn~ut actt .1;Ys te ,as "4 szonf, 1,W) '.,s te% CommAnd.

ir5I.'~cIM Ut Ao .~

design are being produced by the major instrument manufacturers and this concept isalmost universally accepted in international transport aviation. It was some timeduring the latLer part of 1955 that directed effort got under way which resulted in theultimate development and production of what we now call the Advanced InstrumentSystem, of which the vertical sk'ales are a part. The significant thing about this

program and the way it began was that the question posed was not how a particularsingle parameter (e.g. altitude, eirspeed, or attitude) should be displayed, butrather, as tt was most appropriately phrased, "What must the pilot know; what must hesee to control an aircraft during normal flight"" Note that this question did not

constrain us to the design of a single instrument, nor did it presupNue any specificinformation requirements. The solution to the question had to be based. b, its nature.on mission performance requirements. Contributing to the solution was an enormouswealth of background knowledge and experience in flying. piloting all kinds ofvehicles under all conditions, and an intimate familiarlty with the instrument, system.sand operattoLal procedures. Many decisions were made intuitively against this

tremendous background of knowledX6 and experience. In retrospect we caz, observe thatthis became the philosopý,v and u'•e corner stone' for the new science which we call'Control-Display.' We were indeed fortunate to be present when this unusual eventoccurred. The particular combinations of skills, experiences and circumstancesccmbined to start us out on a new end promising line of endeavor.

In our initial endeavor we limited the scope to that degree which teemed to us to

be within our capacity to handle and produce useable results within a reasonable periodof time. Our standards were reasonable also. since we hoped not for the best, but weresiding at producing a product that was suitable for toe job. The. pr)gram was notbegun with the intent of developing vertical-scale instruments as an end in Itself. Thisshould be clearly understooJ. The requrtment for vertical scales knd ultimatedevelopment of them came about as a result of neds recognized as the program progress 1 .

The attitude indicator was selected as being the central instrument fundamental toinstrument flight. It was the foundation and we btm.pted to construct upon and around

it displasys which would enhance and work in harmony with this attitude indicatoreliminating s- wurh me p"wthle those .nconsiat~nciea so prevalent among the inde-pendently desiv#ed displays. Building out from the altitud- indicator was to !- al

the information which was perti:.ent to the control of attitude and flight. Ourphilosophy wsit simple: prexcn! all the parareters that art related to the pitch of theaircraft and all those that are rolated to the ..- tmuth and do so in a tanmer such that

there w)uld be consitent cues of motion and respose betwen the display. thecontrols, the extrrnal visual world and the kinesthetic senses. This resulted in

what is well knownnowasthe T-scmmn andproducedasetof instruments known am the ftam4 It

instruments. More formally they are called the Advanctd Instrument system see 7igm.I and 2I. These ins,ruments have b-en a prodcctton installation in our r-106 and P-105airplanes for some time now (riz.3),

As In well known. it would not be possible to introduce anything U *strariqe asthis Into a cockpit without, many problems and much concern. and rightfully wo.The changes reprsented here are not only changes in display, which are certainty of-once--n. but s%1 chan•ne in the mechaliation. •airly conventional urvo tech.tiq-4s

were used, but thp mere introduction of servo instruments into -- marv flight

instruments was a trul"y significant change (Fli.4.). In rlace !i.e altimter withIt% bq'lovss and mechrnical linkLaes we now have an Instrum,ent with not onlv the

3

mechanical liukages replaced with a servo, but with five servi loops. This is anInstrument with about one thousand parts and a volumetric efficiency almost twicethat of any preceding instrument. Naturally. questions were raised about such thingsas prodtrcibility, cost. maintainability, and reliability. In addition, theseinstrumelits looked different, which was perhaps the greatest obstacle to their intro.duction. There were tests and still more tests. Each new group had to run tests.Each group inspecting the instruments were concerned about cost, reliability and utility.

3. TESTS

What was the outcome? How were they acc~pted' Were, there problems in usagat? Howreliable and maintainable are they as looked at from the vantage point of hindsight"Suning up the experience. comments and test reports I think we can conservative-ysay that they were amazingly successful, particularly when it Is considered thatonly four years elapsed between their inception and their production. eomtiared witria normal time of seven years. A bibliography and various teat reports with regardto these instruments, or vertical instruments to general, are appended to this Report.I would like to review briefly some extracts from these docurents and experiences.

WADC TR 58-431 is a report on these instruments covering developmental work andextensive flight testing performed by the Air Force at Wright Field, Ohio. Manycritical consents were Cotained regarding such things as scale factors, reflection.sticking and switching. However, a moat significant point to nots is the uni-ersalacceptance of the instruments; the criticisms were generally constructive and pertainedto mechanization aspects. Reliatility was a concern and a considerable mount of datawas obtained which was useful in improving the mechanizationi.

One of the most recent reports, dated Vsrc~h 192. has boon issuod b.y the USAInstrument Pilot Instructor School of Randolph Air Fores 9aso. Texas. Thr. School

had perforoed an operational test utd evaluation of the Integrated Flight InstrumsentSystem. The purpose of the teet was to determine the suitability of this system fortransport-tyrpe aircraft &And to deterain.) bow pilot perfonnance woulc4 be, affected byloss Of Trirousi cowponents of the system. Insptallation wast in a T-19. Ten pilotsfnom the School awory subjects. In addition, twenty smu pilots from MATS. MAA. Lidthe C'-141 Program office tlew orientation flights on the system. Infornatloo wariobtained by *vans of questionnaires. The report comments "... generally the nte.grated flight instrument systte was enthuslastically received... The averagetransition t!ao to attain proficiency rn the now system varied botween four andsix hours flyin& timt... All subject pilots connected with tt pr-oject universallyR, ' fo that the JntCLrsted f~ight Instrument system was suitable for use on jettriniport-ty~e aircraft ... It may be stated that Vi. Integrated flight linstrume~ntsystem provtdrs the pilot with a complete and satisfactory nastrvaent panel wbichmakes It highly suitable for ijse Ir. high- jerfurvnuce aircraft".

Naturally dtriclencies mere pointtrd out, with rocrmoinenatinns for Improvement.For esemlo. the wirrux ralues on the altiieteti s hould be depictel in red. Whitelighting sOwuld be incorporated. A teil or reciprocal bearing Indicator should beadded tn the bearing pointer of the 1151. WHowver, all the ror-oinemodatiooa ccacocrnelde14tails: naoe was rritical of the thewe or general scheme

Over twelve squadrons are now "sing thee Irstrumenty in operational aircraft and

4

excess of 2500 instruments have been produced. There has teen a continuing programto follow up on operational experience for purposis of checking maintenancereliability experience and hccomnlilahing improvements in the de.,ign. These c. Chave involved such things as teflon coating for rollzrs and brakes, reducing il~ctivecharacteristics of caver glass, even lighting over the whole surface. circul .' improve-

ments, mechanical changes to improve strength, clearances and weight. Pilot :ceptancehas been good. Performance and maintenance have also been good.

4. THE FUJTURE

What does the future hold for these instrumens' Wbaf are possi.ile fuiture instruments7What does the future look like for the control-display area')

In order to discuss these questions in a meaningful ganner it is necessary first toconsider the philosophy or attitude of the Air Force. The Air Florce desires to 'Getthe Job done' and z do it in the most efrective and expeditious manner, vrithou-_texpensive ft ills and embellishments. In the, case of the cockpit It is desired to putinto it those instruments said dimplays which are necessary for satisfactory andeffective use of the vehicle; everything else is secondary. Advances in vehicleperformance have made this job more difficult. The demands upon dCjplaym liave becomemore stringent, which has restilted In the increased attention and effort necessary toachieve satisfactory systems performance.

This situai ion does not allow us to rely only on the intuitive judgment of afew people. The demands of the mission. the vehicle. and other sub-s"stem diversmonshave forced ust to develop special control-display engineers in o,'dor to cope with theproblem of designing an iadeqiate system.

It was necessary tv, establisht a special program to provido these required capabailities.Th~ts is now called th. Air Force Clontrol -Display Program. PNit@. h:1W9ver. that theattitude Is still the smaw. Tfhe tob c..st be done satiafa&ctorIy. efficiently. andeconomically.

At this poidt it Is again a4Vropriato t.i c-irrect the misunderstandings statioutid

Oarlier. The Air Porce Ctmtrol-DAisplY Program produre(. the Adv&aced Instrument Systeoi.A distinctive feature of this system in the vortica. %hap#elr two irtmtrusie~ts. sire*then people have ta~kid of the Air Force Vertical Instrument Program. Apparently this.in turn, led to the gonoralirstlon that th.- Air Force *,mts vertlesi Instruments.Nowever, this in not the case. What Is wanted to the most suitable design fat, thejob, whether it be straight, round, or spiral.

An to rhe future of these instruments. we can moat conxeniently think in terms of!he Immod.nte future andc then what might cowt thereafter. For the Imediate future.as might be expected. things probatly will not change radicall~y. Am we %ove Into thenext period gevater h&angvs wCl emerge. Thea. will be ovoluticnary to nature.rather thtan revolutionary. Beyond1 that we can expct consIders'Ale changes not only amthe result of learning more about how to g@^. informattoo to the man visually, Wualso as a result "f some of the very differ-errt kind of generation techniquos which arejust in their formative rose&-ch stagos at the moment.

The AdvanceJ Instrument System was not intended to deal with the problem totally,

but it was to be a start upon which we could build. One of the essential requirementsimposed was that it should have growth potential. Our family name for this system,

the Phase II Instruments, ieflects this. There had already been a set called thePhase I Instruments ani we Euticipated a Phase III. We are now in the process of

working on the Phase III Instruments. They will not be radically different in

appearance. However, their development process does reflect the continual advances

being made in this new science.

The Phase II Instruments were designed for general flight conditions, with some special

vrovision for the interceptor mission. Their design did not provide for certain

problem phases of flight. One of these is the Approach and Landing Phase. Instrumentflight to touch-down under zero-zero conditions does not yet have a routine solution.

This phase is our particular concern now. We are pursuing a program which we hopL willprovide a practical solution for control of a manned vehicle under IPR during

approach and landing. Note that the problem is one of control. Both displays and man

are essential ingredients or components of the total control system. A feasible

concept of solution must be devised for the total problem before anything useful can

be done in developing a component. In the past the solution required consideration

of the physics of the problem. System synthesis was useful as an adjunct toconceptualizing possible system solutions. Permissible variables included sensing

devices, computers, displays and modifications to the airframe and piloting technique.

This effort on a problem and the conceptL.Lizing of a system solution led us to

the point where we could begin to identify more specifically the demands for informa-

tion requirements to be imposed upon the display system. This involved taking the

?hase II displays and augmenting them with the necessary display of additional

information needed. The first important item is vertical path angle information. The

pilot controls attitude, but his objective is control of the flight path of his vehicle.

It was thought necessary to display path angle in combination with pitch angle on the

attitude indicator. The second important item, amost critical one. is absolute altitude

or remaining altitude over touch-down. That is, a direct measurement of the heitiht of

the aircraft above the runway. When synthesizing a solution many assumptions may be made

which very much uirplifv the problem, at least in totally conceiving and defcrihine the

required solution. Thus, in this case, we assumed that there was a completely adequate

system for measuring the distance between the aircraft and the ground. (An outcome of this

approach is a detailing of the requirement:ý such a system must satisfy.) Pursuing this

asdumption further, in-so-far as the display is concerned, we found that we not only

u.•ed to have absolute altitude information. but that we must have it in order to makemeaningful decisions about the rate of descent of the aircraft. Therefore, these two par-ticular pleceq of ir.fornation xust be related in the display. It also appeared that altitude

need be known only in the detail that is necessary to allow proper and adequate ludgement

in controlling the rate of descent. Consequently, we took our Phase II altimeter and

added to it u tape indication which moved proportionally to the absolute altitude overthe vertical velocity scale. When making judgements about his rate of descent the

pilot needs only a qualitative indication, a Judgement of the absolute altitude io.forms-

tion. This was only the initial step in the design of the dispaV. The dynamics are

another problem which, from the practical viewpoint, canonlybesolved through synthesis,

it is impractical to attempt the variations in the dynamics and provide for the control

rer.uired in an aircraft flight test program This must be done initially in a simu-

lator. Onlh after the initial difficulties have been eliminated should the installa-

t'.tn oe made in the aircraft Our initial efforts were in trying variatiors of this

tape in combination with the rate of climb. we tried linear and non-linear scale

6

functions. logarthmic rind tcoken. :rale, and, of course, we varied the scale factcr,damping. range, aid pilLt techniqu,; and it is most. important to ,emember thet

pilot technique is a varias.

While we are interested in mi:itary missions this problem of IFR approach andlanding is not peculiar to milit.iry missions. The Federal Aviation Agency is concernedwith the landing problem as it pertains to civilian aircraft. As a result of this

common interest in all-weather landing there was established a joint effort specificallyrelated to the altitude instrument necessary for landing. In this effort we conducteda test program on three different instruments, each of which provided absolute

altitude information. In each design the scale factors, damping and response

rate were the result of prior design effort to optimize each version. Other versions',ad been previously considered (see Figs. 5 and 6) Instrument delivery problemsr:quired vs to use a Phase IIA instrument modified to conform in the essentialstG ti Phase ill Instrument characteristiPs. A i-inch wide module instrument anda clicular scal, instrument were the other two t0sted. The three instruments in theirpanel arcangp- it are shown with a standard practice panel in Figure 7.

This progam has just been concluded last month and a report has not yet been

ruolished. H1owever, the conclusions indicate, wit.out reservation, that absolutelt~tui,, ý- indeed, an essential ingredient, Furthermore, while there wdre dif-

fvence" -. tueen the instruments they all produced an improvement compared with

the cor:'.tIon in which this information was utterly lacking. It should be noted thathere wc were attempting to display the needed infoosation in the most suitable

manner. The results indicate that such information mEa be displayed vertically or ona circular scale, with the choice of vertical or circular scale being dependentupon other fac:ors. Therefore a test on performance would not permit a generalizedconclusion as to which is the better scale. Among the most important of these other factorsare the specific problems of installation encountered in tailoring the instrument toa given vehicle. Certainly costs are a consideration u well. Again, I would like to

emphasize that we do not have a vert*cal-instrusent program. We have an instrumentprogram which is not biased against vertical Instruments or against any other type cfins~truments. Note also that in correiating this to our scientific advancement we aredealii1 with the problem in more of aii *neiueerlnt ma.ier, gettinlg such things asaytitems

synthesis and information requirements irranged in their proper sequence.

The third item which we added to the information to be displayed is distance totouchdown. This information we tentatively Integrated on the horisontal situationdispliay.

All these display items which I have just discussed as being part of our Phase IIIendeavor are in the process of Installation in aircraft and wili be subjected, during

the r(oinK months, to a very broao flight verification by a cross-section of themoso expert military and airline d1lot% in the United States. we have, already,experimental evidence that thit line of endeavor is on the right track and will producevery significant results. It should be noted that in this endeavor not only are theessential dinplav sarcts under @vaiuatiori. but also that they are in imately Integratedwith different schemes of automaticity in the control of the aircrast. This is donein sulh a marner that the pilot Is oriented as the most reliable element in the .,ontrol

l•,p. that Is as an active contr,.l element himself. This nrw Air Morce concept o, totalIntegration of tanual and automatic flight with the necessary display of essential flight

7

information, tor the entire range from direct manual control to all degrees of auto-matic control, is, in our opinion, the only way to arrive at the tot%! soluti-n. A-has been mentioned earlier, displays singularly or within the wider context of adisplay system cannot be treated separately. They must be considered intimately withthe total control problem, be it manual or automatic.

The Phane II! airspeed, ah advancument over the Phase II airspeed, is now beingstudied, but ij not nearly as far advanced as the Phase III altimeter. We have not,as yet, done much directly on the speed instrument, although the system synthesis hasimplications bearing upon the requirements or characteristics desired of the P.ause IIIairspeed. We are now building an instrument. a sketch of which is shown in Figure 3,but we have -.o dpte on it yet,

It is interesting to note that we seem to have provided a release of inhibitionsas far as vertical scales, or more properly, linear straight scales, are concerned.They are now being considered for very many applications, such as engine instruments,'time to go' information ani fl'el-distanre relationship. In addition they are notonly being used for displaying primary information, but also for drawing comparisonsbetween different kinds of information where the comparison itself is the meaningfulinformation, as in the fuel management indicator (Fig.9). There have been a numbero! interesting ýnpovations proposed for tbese scales; Ree, for erample, the sketchin Figure 10, which is a vertical scale with a variable graduation or variable scalefactor capability, Another interesting facet of the new look in the instrument fieldis the fact that the instrumentation or mechanization is following the display, ratherthan, as in the past, the display having to suit itself to mechanization capabilities.For example, we have had new developments in high-speed counters, miniature counters,and electroluminescence, tailored to the needs of displaying information in variousforms. There are new capabilities in the tape and tape drives and miniature mpgneticclutches and a renewed interest in investigating and advancing other means of generatingdisplays, even such exotic ideas as true volumetric three-dimensional displays andinstruments which accept digital input and provide an analog display, although tney haveno moving parts.

Finally. I would like to mention work in progress aimed at developing a comletecontrol-display system. 7his program has pursued analytical treatment for derivinginformation requirements. is making use of the latest advances in all aspects offlight control, and is applicable to a multi-orbit vehicle. Figure Il gives ageneralized diagram of the system and Figure 12 shows the panel layout.

8

BIBLIOGRAPHY'

Baker, C.A. Visual Presentation of Information, USAF, Wright Air

Urether, W.F. Development Center, Wright Patterson Air Force Base,Ohio Technical Report 54-160, 1954.

Beals, L.S. Integrated Instrumentation for Modern Aircraft. ASTIA

Technical Data Cig., July 1952.

Beddingfield, S.T. Bulova Altimeter Evaluation. USAF, WADC Flight TestReport WCT 59-29, Wright Air DevElopment Center, Wright-

Patterson Air Force Base, 9 February 1959,

Beldam, F.E.M. A Comparison of Four Altimeter Presentations. Canada,

RCAF, Institute of Aviation Medicine Report No. 56/1,

February 1956.

Beldam, F.E.M. A Comparison of Experimental Altimeter Presentations

Canada, RCAF, Institute of Aviation Medicine ReportNo. 57/1, 1957.

Beldam, F.E.M. A Study to Determine an o.ttimum Altimeter Presentation

Canada, RCAF Institute of Aviation Medicine Report No.

59/2, May 1959.

Lradley. J.V. Desirable Control-Display Rel. '"onshtp for Movzng-Scale

Instruments. WADC Technical Report 54-423, Wright AirDevelopment Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base,Ohio (AD 61819). September 154

Brow,., E.L. The L•SF iVertical Instrument Frogram. Advisory Groupfor Aeronautical Research and Development Report 236.

North Atlantic Treaty Organizatic:, Palais de Chaillot,Paris, France. Report presented at thv Joint Meeting

of the Flight Test Panel and Aeiomed~cal Panel, 11-15

May 1959 at Athens, Greece. (AD 237624)

Brown, J.E. Instrument I tghting, Instrument Colour Coding an6

Gene:al Illuxinatton (Bibliography). The Martin

Company, AF 31(..16)-7752, Martin siuman Engineering

Support ; oup Memorandum Report No. 61-6, 29 March 1961.

Brown, S.L. Comparative Evaluation of Ten Alt meter Presentations.

Directorate Flight and All-Weatn-." Testing, Wright-

Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton ýJhio, Techaical NoteWCT 54-37, April 1954.

9

Cohen, J. The Effects oj Absolute and Conditional Probability Distri-Senders. Virginia, L. buttons on Instrument Reading. III: A Comparison of a

l.inear Scale and Two Scales with Expanded Central Portions.WADC Technical Report 57-65 (AD 118019). Wright AirDevelopment Division, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base.Ohio, March 1958.

Connally, R.E. Evaluation of the Air Force Integrated Flight InstrumentSyste, and Engine Parameter Indicator. WADC TechnicalNote 59-414. Wright Air Development Center, Wright-Patterson Air For"- Base. Ohio, December 1959.

Cock Research Laboratories. Symposium on the LWW Flight Control Display IntegrationProgram. Report of a Symposium held on February 3-4.1958. Presented by the Flight Control Laboratory, AirResearch and Development Command, Wright Air DevelopmentCenter. Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, 1958.

Elam, C.B. Altimeter Display Study - Summary of Experimental Testing.et alia Prepared under Contract AF 33(616)-8236, Task 82144,

Project 6190. Bell Helicopter Company, Fort Wort-, Texas,January 1962.

Elkin, E.H. Effects of Scale, Shape, Exposure line, aiul Display-Response Complexity on Scale Reading Efficiency. WADCTechnical Report 58-472 Wright Air Development Center,Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, (AD 209381),February 1958.

Pike, AI. Display of Altttude Information on Rectilinear Scales.The Martin Company, AF 33(616)-3749, Engineering Report10,732, April 1959.

Fitts, P.M. EngLneering Psychology and Equipment Design. In S. S,Stevens 1handbook of Experimental Psychology. Joht Wileyand Sons. New York. 1951.

Foley. P.J. A Summ'iry to bate on the Application of Non-Ltnear Scalesof the Logarithmtc Type to Altimeter Design. DefenseResearch Medical laboratories Draft Report DRMl Pile No.160-1/0-164.

Gainer, C.A. Non-Linear Alt.udc S'aling for lBuluva Altimeter. Theat alia Martin Company, AP 33(616',-7752. Martin Human Engineering

Support Group Conference Memorandum No. 30.

Gainer, CA. The bulova Altiaeter. The Martin Company. AF 33(616)-7752, Martin Human Engineering Support Group ConferenceMemorandum No. 37. 19 September 1958.

10

Gainer, C.A. Final Recoumendat tons, Bulova Altimeter Conftguratton.

The Martin Company, AF 33(616)-7752. Martin Human Engin-eering Support Group Conference Memorandum No. 49, 20October 1958.

Gainer, C.A. l ike-off Information Incorporated into the Phase 11 Mach

Airspeed Indicator. The Martin Company, AF 33(61S)-7752,

Martin Human Engineering Support Group Conference Memorandum

No. 64.

Gainer, C.A. Scale Factors for B-70 Primary Flight Instrumtntatton.

The Martin Company, AF 33(616)-7752, Martin Human Engin-

eering Support Group Conference Memorandum No. 95.

Gainer. C.A. Altimeter Scaling, Combinatton of Linear Factors. The

Martin Company. AF 33(616)-7752, Martin Human EngineeringSupport Group Conference Memorandum No. 101. 5 June 1959.

Gainer, C.A. Modifications of the Bulova Altimeter, 1O-Inch. TheMartin Company, AF 33(616)-7752, Martin Human EngineeringSupport Group Conference Memorandum No. 110, 9 July IP59.

Gainer, C.A. The Display of Altitude Information. (Bibliography).The Martin Company, A•l 33(616)-7752, Martin Human Engineering

Support Group Conference Memorandum No. 121.

Gainer, C.A. Ituman Engineering Recommendattons for the Display of Mach-Airspeed Information. The Martin Company, A? 33(616)-7752.

Martin Human Engin ,ring Support Grour Conference Memo-

randum No. 155.

Gainer, C.A. 7he Study of Pilot Eye Ftxattont while Flying Seject4cdRosinia. M.L. Alaneuvers Using the Air Force Integrated Instrument Pavnel.

The Martia Company. Baltimore 3, Maryland. A? 33(616)-T752

Martin Human Engineering Group, Engineering Report (In

preparation).

Grahm. N.E. The *'veed and Accuracy of Reading 'orttontul, Vertical.and Circular Scalts. J. appi. Paychol., Vol. 40, 195l .

Graham. N.E. Manual 7racking in Resuc'nse to the Dtsplay of l*risgntal,et alil lertical, and Circular Scales. Brit. J. Paychol.. Vol. 42.

1951.

Jackson, K.F. Presentatioi of Height Information. International Air

Transport Association Conference Report No. 13/UP-39.

-Lucerne. Switzerland. May 1960.

Jenkins, W.L. Mean Least lurn and Its Rlelatton to Making Settings on a

Linear Scale. WADC Technical Report 57 210 (ASTIA No. AD

118174) Wright Air Development Center. Wright-Pattersob

Air Porce base. Ohio.

11

Jenkins, W. L. The Influence of I te,!yng Distance in Making Set tngsKarr, A.C. on a Linear Scale. WADC Technical Note 55-204 (AD 95410).

Wright Air Development Center, Wright-Patterson AirForce Base. Ohio, November 1955.

Kearns. J.H. Systema Design Methodology: Some Aspects of the Problemof Display Integration. ASO Technical Note 61-5, PlightControl Laboratory, Aeronautical Systems Division, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, May 1961.

Kearns. J.H. oc.kptt Control-Display Subsystem Engineering. ASDRitchie. MIL. Technical Report 61-545, Flight Control Laboratory,

Aeronautical Systems Division, Wright-Patterson AirForce Base. Ohio. October 1961.

Lear, Incorporated *hole Panel Study and Development. Summary Report1957-1958. WADC Technical Report 58-447, ASTIA AD155815, Lear ER No. 1289-1, Wright-Patterson AirForce Base. Ohio, March, 1959.

Le.', Incorporated Whole Panel Control-Display Study Summary ReportJuly 1958 - July 19M. tolune I: Methodology ]orControl-Display Systems Development. Lear ER No.OR-1364 (1). WAIX Technical Report 61-91, Wright AirDevelopment Center. Wright-Patterson Air Force Base,Ohio. July IG.

Lemons. V.L. lItght Tests of the PAU) Integrated Instrument System.WADD Technical Note 59-297. flight Test Division, Flightand Engineering Teat Group, Wright Air DevelopmentDivision. Wright-Patterson Air Force Usae, Oh!o, June 1960.

Mengelkoch. f.F. Investigations of lertical Display of Alttude Informaaton.Houston., R.C. 1: (vaparison of a Aving Tlpe and Stwidard Aitmeter

en a Simulated tligiht Task. WADC Technical Report 57-384.Wright Air Development Center. Wright-Patterson Air Iorce

Base. Ohio. March 1958.

Mengelkoch, t.r. 1nivetittlaion of lerti'al Ousplays of Altitude Information.Houston. R.C. II: 'the Effect of Pract ce on Performance of a Simulated

fltght Test tstng a .ibvtng Tape Altimeter. WADC TechnicalReport 57-385, Wright Air Development Center. Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. Ohio. March 1958,

Mkagolkoch. fP. Results of t'w Phase 11-4 4ernter Tare Alttmeter Pilot(ipintun .Surfrey. Thy Martin Comany, A? 33(616)-7752.

Martin Human Engineering Support Group ConfereneeMemormndum No. 186. 3 August 1960.

Mengelkoch. R.fP. P'iloI SisuIater Performance wt ch IK" • Igt InstrumentPanels. The Martin Company. Baltimore 3. Maryland. Al

33(616)-7152. Martin Human Engineering Grousp. EngineeringReport %o. 1O.R46. Sovtvber 1960. irevited)

12

Mengelkoch, R.F. Investigation of ierttcal Displays of Attitude Informa-Houston, R.C. tion. III: The Efftci of an Expanded Scale on Performance

of a Simulated Flight Task Lstng a Movtng-Iape Altieter.WADC Technical Report E7-549, Wright Air DevelopmentCent.r. Wright i.tterson Air Force Base, Ohio. March 1958.

Vuckler, F.A. lhe Display of Altitude Information. The Martin Company.AP 33(616)-7752. Martin Human EnLineering Support GroupConference Memorandum No. 80, 23 March 1959.

Narva. M.A. Discussion (Concerntng Co" tion Indicator and Graduationson Eclipse-Pioneer Alttie.er. The Martin Company, AF33(616)-7752 Martin Human Egineering Support GroupConfertince Memorandum No. 42, 29 Septeowber .958.

Narva, M.A. Proposed ýertical .Seed Indicator. The Martin Company,AF 33(616)-7752. Martin Human Engineering Support Group,Conference Memorandum No. 50. 27 Octob3r 1058.

Obermayer. R.W. Straight Scale Instrumentation and Flight InstrumentScaling. Bibliography. Th•i Martin Company, A? 33(616)-7752,

Martin Human Engineering Support Group Memorandum Report61-2. 21 Feb 1961.

Oltmanns, R.A. Engineering ivaluation of iulova M•R Aircraft Altimeter.USAF Project NR 1';C 59-193 RDh OCAMA. April 1959.

Ritchie, ML, Psychological ASpectLt of Cockpit Design - A Symot!SumBaker. C.A. Report, WADC Technical Report 57-117, Wright Air Development

Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, April, 1957.

Schum, D.A. A I t tate . - Dt sp lay and thardware DevLe lopmen t 903- .1960.et slil Prepared under Contract No. A? 33 (616)-7248, Task 82144,

PioJect 6190. 2ell Helicopter Compatny. Fort Worth. Texas,August 196W.

Simon. C.W. Alt:aetry S.-dtes. 1: An Experimental (Cjopart;on of Thrreet al&i Pictorial and "hreer y^Woltc Displays of ,41!ttude, ,erticat

s.peed, and Alitiide (.oanands. Culver City, California:Hughes Aircraft Company, Tech Memo No. 425, 1 January 1956.

Skeen. J.R. .4 .Stud) of ;racktng Performance on "hfree lertical LinearAttitude LDsplays. Baltimore, Maryland: The, Martin Company,

Enginertng Report (In preparationl.

Sleight, R.B. Ine Effe•t of Instrument Dial .9ýape on Leg'tlilty.i. JApl.Psychol.. Vol 32(2). April 1948. pv 170-1811.

Stone. J.T. Rieview o f W.Aif Rescarch aaii bDeie•upenf /fferts on Alrtaetr).Plight Control Laborstory. Wright-Patterson Air Forre use,Ohio, April 1960

13

Svisonoff. C. Air Force Integrated Flight Instrumen! Pan l. WAICTechnical Report 58-431, Wright Air Development Center.

Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, October 1958.

Tabak, S.W. (Ueratin lest and Fvaluaton of the Integrated FlightInstrument System. Training Research and D)evelopment

Project NR 60-6. USAF Instrument Pilot Instructor School,

Randolph Air Force Base, Texas, March 1962.

Travis. U.N. .4 Gosparison of 14 Altimeter Presentations. Air Ministry

Flying Personnel Research Committee (England) PWRC Memo

104. March 1959.

Wright, L.C. The Air Frorce Program for Improved Flight Instrumentation.

WALC Technical Report No. 56-582, Wright Air Deveopment

Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Chio, November1956.

IiI,

15

I u I

16

a -a

i. .. . .

SiII

tj

ii !lil I I IIit1 l I'1 '!'111 IPI I ' I!I

17

lb-

IlI

nor="18

-40M-

II -C

Fij.5ka) ta III, altimeter

A

a

U0I-

II

21

Fig." 7 Ph... 111' aispr~pd

22

i.

23

FLSNT PATH ALTITUDE FTANGlLE

02000000

51000000

0500000

400000

300000

200000

100000

* 50ooo40ooo

5 30000

10000

* Sooo4 000

2 ooo

I 000200

FPA I EARO SETCOMMANDI 12 9 ,9 21

P 0

Fig, 9 Ve•rtical "lIs with vauriable s.ale-ractor

24q

U

25

III

iII

DISTRIBUTION

Copies of AGARD publications may be obtained in thevarious countiies ait the addresses given below.

On peut se procurer des exempimires des publicationsdp IAGARD aux adresses suivantes.

BELGIUM Centre National d'Etudes et de Rectierch-.BELGIQUE Aernnoutiques

11. rue d'Egmont. Bruxelles

CANADA Director of Scientific Information ServiceDefense Research &rardDepartment o~f National Defen&,e'A' Building(, Ottawa, Ontario

DENMARKN Military Research Butii~iP)ANFWAK Defense Staff

Kasteliet, Copenhagen 6

FT~kNCI O.N.E.R.A. (Direction)25, Avenue de Is Division LeclercChlitillon-soua-Bagneus (Seine)

OURMANY Wisaenachaftliche Gesellachaft fur LuftfahrtALLEMAGNE Zentralstelle der Luftfahrtdokumentation

Munchen 64. I'luthafenAttn: Dr. ?, J. flattenberg

Gotaff.Gipek National Defonse General StaffGRWF B. MW

Athens

ICUAND Dirortor of AviationI SIIT c RIo lugrTd

Royktkvik

ITALY oA ffGiR o dei Goner-ale IainttoreITALIE del Genict Adrenautebo

Ministero Difese Arronautica

1, 16%

t 11FUG Obtainable through Belgium

ANFADDir Nectowroandn Driegation ?n .AGAPATS PA% Wrhirlde Reeutrich in

Dtl ft

NOR",-AY Mr. 0. Blichner?ORVEGE Norwegian Defence Research Establishment

Kjeller per Lillestrim

PORTUGAL Col. I.A. de Almeida Viama(Delegado Nacional do 'AGARD' )

Direcqio do Servico de Material da F.A.Rua da Escola Politecnica. 42

Lisboa

TURKFY Ministry of National Defence

TURQUIE AnkaraAttn. AGARD National Delegate

UNITED KINGDOM Ministry of Aviation

ROYAUME UNI T.I.L., Room 009AFirst Avenue House

High Holborn

London W.C.l

UNITED STATES National Aeronautics and Space Administration

ETATS UNIS (NASA)1520 H Street. N.W.Washington 25. D.C.

ý. Pgfw;./•l c.~,.,t'

[] ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 lViJ Il IdII I Il Il l I lt dfI II--J-1%~ i •Ii l l • I

mm mnm m n mm m mh m mmmmm m m m • mmm m m m m mYtm